


% 


~ 


DUKE 
UNIVERSITY 





DIVINITY SCHOOL 
LIBRARY 


BLACKVELL’S 


ee. a 











Handbooks for the Clergy 


EDITED BY 


ARTHUR W. ROBINSON, B.D. 


VICAR OF ALLHALLOWS BARKING 
BY THE TOWER 


THE STUDY OF 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 





; m Ce Petes. 
1. AG G0 
. han " } 

pa 
i VAAL. oe rd 
“ ci, ig ry 
; r¢ v1} TA i? } 
‘ 


THE STUDY OF 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 


BY 


WILLIAM EDWARD COLLINS, B.D. 


— 
PROFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY AT KING'S COLLEGE LONDON 
CHAIRMAN OF THE CHURCH HISTORICAL SOCIETY ; COUNCILLOR 
OF THE ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY 


LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON 
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY 
1903 


All rights reserved 


* 


WO ¥AITH 





Div.S. 
xX 70,07 
LIS) S 


TO 


MY PUPILS 


AT 


KING’S COLLEGE LONDON 
1893-1903 


DISCIPULUS CONDISCIPULIS 





se 


PREFACE 


Tuis little book is the realisation, all too unworthy 
as I know well, of a plan which has been long in 
my mind. Having had to teach ecclesiastical 
history continuously for some twelve years, I have 
endeavoured again and again, as doubtless other 
teachers have, to say something in lecture as to 
the methods of study to be used. But whilst 
lecturing is the ideal method of imparting some 
kinds of knowledge, it is ill fitted for the com- 
munication of such guidance as this; and I have 
felt increasingly the need of a book which could 
be placed in the hands of students at our colleges, 
and of those who, being already at work in their 
parishes, desire to continue their historical studies. 
It is for these two classes (they are really one) 
that I have written; and the book is not intended 
primarily as a manual for the professed student 
of history. Nevertheless I venture to hope that 
some of these may find it useful. 

It may be noticed that I have spoken through- 
out of “ecclesiastical history” rather than of 
“Church history.” Ihave done so of set purpose ; 
and the reason will be obvious to anybody who 
will read the first chapter of this book. In point 

vu 


Vili Preface 

of fact there may be nothing to choose between 
the two phrases; and rightly understood, Church 
history is as wide a definition as one could wish 
for. But as long as people will go on thinking 
that Church history is concerned only with one 
class of acts, or one sect of mankind (even though 
it be the sect “of Paul,” or “of Apollos,” or “ of 
Cephas,” or “‘of Christ”), so long will it seem 
desirable to use any variant that serves to guard 
against such an idea, even though it be identical 
in meaning. 

I am sensible that the list of books in the last 
chapter is open to the criticism of being somewhat 
unsystematic and capricious: the books are not 
graduated in any way, and no attempt is made to 
arrange them so as to form a consecutive course 
of reading. But I have adopted this plan on 
purpose. Those for whom the book is intended 
will not be likely to enter upon a systematic course 
of study on these lines, nor is it to be desired that 
they should doso. And I hope that the list may 
be more useful by way of suggestion because it 
contains books of all kinds arranged in this 
apparently unstudied order. It might, of course, 
have been prolonged indefinitely ; but it did not 
seem wise to occupy more of the space at my 
disposal in this way. 

Some students, and especially such as are quite 
new to the study of ecclesiastical history, may 
find it advisable to pass on directly from the first 
chapter to the fifth and those which follow it, 


Preface ix 


returning afterwards to chapters ii-iv, which 
they will then be in a better position to appre- 
ciate. But I greatly hope that they will not 
omit these last-mentioned chapters, under the 
impression that for the elementary student they 
are irrelevant. Nothing could really be further 
from the truth. 

I have made use, in writing this book, of the 
notes of several addresses which I have given in 
different places, and in one or two cases of what I 
have said elsewhere in writing; but it has not 
seemed necessary in such cases to give references. 
And I trust that in the strictures which I have 
felt bound to make upon certain books, chosen 
in illustration of particular kinds of errors, there 
may be nothing which passes the bounds of 
charity or of courtesy. 


W. E. COLLINS. 


Sr Niyzan’s House, Perrta, 
Feast of St Augustine of Hippo, momu11. 





CONTENTS 


CHAPTER I 


Tue Meanine anv Score or Eccrxsiasticat History 
PAGES 
What Ecclesiastical History is not—What it is— 
No limitations in subject - matter—No 
limitations in time—Limitations in point 
of view—Truly historical in method—A 
priori methods inadmissible—The Church 
historian seeks good in all sides—D’ Aubigné 
and Von Ranke . : ; : : . 41-14 


CHAPTER II 


Tue Science or History 


History not a branch of literature—The applica- 
tion of the scientific method to a particular 
class of data—These data unlike those of the 
natural sciences ; history not a *‘ science of 
observation ’—The limitations of historical 
knowledge—Really incidental to the subject 
—History concerned with the actions of 
rational beings—Though it does not usurp 
the function of a judge of morals—Yet its 


facts are *‘ moral facts” . : " . 15-27 
Xi 


xii 


Contents 


CHAPTER III 
Historica Meruop 


1. The Work of Analysis 


The claims of scientific method—I. The collection 


of material—Printed collections : of private 
persons, of societies, of public bodies— 
Scattered and unpublished material—The 
process of discovery—Aids of all sorts— 
Finality never reached—II. The examina- 
tion of documents—Guides—No substitute 
for original work—Not enough to know a 
work is genuine, contemporary, honest— 
A work of opposite character not necessarily 
worthless—Forgeries have a certain value— 
Ill. The investigation of details—The con- 
sideration of motive—Copying—The argu- 
ment from silence, when valid—Examples 
—The historian’s ‘‘ methodical distrust ”— 
IV. Possible sources of error— Froude’s dis- 
ease”’—Treating facts as isolated units: 
Mr Herbert Spencer—Mixing processes— 
‘* History with a purpose” . ps 


CHAPTER IV 


Historica Mersop 


2. The Work of Synthesis 


Full of difficulty—I. A mental picture of the 


events—Dangers and safeguards—IlI. The 
picture to be scrutinised in detail_—Without 
this nothing has been done—-It must be 


PAGES 


Contents xill 


systematic and exhaustive—A systematic 
series of questions—III. Filling in of gaps by 
reasoning — Inference —The comparative 
method and method of survivals : examples 
—Is conjecture allowable ?—IV. Collecting 
and systematising : methods—V. Sources of 
error—Undisciplined use of the imagina- 
tion—A priori assumptions—VI. Historical 
method learnt by observation: suggested 
books : 


CHAPTER V 


How to Strupy Eccixsiasticat History 


Historical method common to all students—I. 
Two schemes of study: better to choose 
a definite subject—II. Advantages of 
this plan: use of spare time—III. Read 
round it as a centre—IV. “ Make it your 
own”—V. Avoid drawing morals: partisan 
study—VI. Right use of the memory, and 
the judgment —VII. Use of note-books, &c. 
—VIII. History banishes illusions—IX. The 
law of diminishing returns . : : . 72-91 


CHAPTER VI 


Tue Cuoice or Booxs 


I. Books good or bad in relation to the reader, not 
in themselves—II. Books written from our 
own standpoint not preferable—IIJ. The 
best books: the place of special treatises, 


Xiv Contents 


PAGES 
general Church histories, text-books, apolo- 
getic works—IV. Subsidiary aids: atlas, 
chronological and genealogical tables, 
lists, &c.—V. Advantages of wide read- 
ing: glancing at, referring to books—VI. 
Value of old books, of different stand- 
points—VII. Original authorities: trans- 
lations, and examples 2 , ; . 92-114 


CHAPTER VII 
SpecraL Aspects oF Stupy 1n Eccriesiastican History 


The spiritual manifested in the natural—I. The 
preparation in Judaism: the Higher 
Criticism — II. The preparation of the 
world—III. Christianity and other re- 
ligions : the Absolute Religion—IV. The 
inter-relation of civil and ecclesiastical ; St 
Paul at Ephesus, Pliny, the Friday fast in 
the English Reformation, the Council of 
Trent, &c.—V. Philosophy and Theology: 
development of doctrine, its nature and 
methods—VI. The Canonical system : its 
nature and growth: principles precede 
practice, and practice precedes theory— 
VII. Marvels and portents : legendary and 
authenticated —VIII. The Church the heir 
of all the ages . : ; : 115-138 


CHAPTER VIII 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


I. Dictionaries, encyclopaedias, and books con- 
taining bibliographical matter—II. Books 


Contents 


for study under separate heads: Judaism 
and Christianity, the heathen world ,and 
Christianity, Christianity and other reli- 
gions, Christian doctrine and philosophy, 
Canon Law, &c., Liturgies, the papacy, 
and miscellaneous—III. Books on special 
periods: Early Church history, to Gregory 
the Great, to the rise of Hildebrand, to 
1500, the Reformation period, the post- 
Reformation period—IV. Books relating to 
particular Churches, &c.: the Eastern 
Churches, the Church of England, other 


XV 


PAGES 


Churches, Monasticism . : § 139-166 





CHAPTER I 


THE MEANING AND SCOPE OF 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 


BerorE attempting to speak in detail of the 
methods to be made use of in studying Ecclesias- 
tical History, it may be well to clear our minds 
a little, and to endeavour to see precisely what 
our subject is. What then do we mean by the 
term Ecclesiastical History ? 

Our first impulse may very naturally be to 
say that ecclesiastical history is exclusively con- 
cerned with a certain definite society, the Church 
of Christ or the Holy Catholic Church; that in 
fact it is the history of the Church in the same 
sense in which we might speak of the history of 
the Army, or of the Royal Society, or the history of 
some particular movement or interest or incident. 
So it has often been regarded; and some people 
have been inclined to say that just as each of these 
is concerned only with one class of facts or one 
department of life, so the subject-matter of eccle- 
siastical history is to be found solely in matters 
ecclesiastical. But a very little consideration will 
show that such a view (in which every teacher of 

A 


2 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


ecclesiastical history will recognise one of the 
most tiresome delusions with which he has to 
contend) is both inadequate and misleading. The 
truth is that it is never possible to isolate one class 
of facts and study them alone by historical 
methods. For the distinctions which we draw 
for purposes of convenience are after all mere 
generalisations which have no existence apart 
from ourselves; and when we classify facts as 
military, or ecclesiastical, or economic, we are 
only going through a mental process which has 
no effect upon their essential character. There 
is no sequence of cause and effect peculiar to 
them; they have no existence apart from the 
whole stream of life of which they are elements. 
We cannot therefore confine our attention solely 
to one class of facts, and treat them as if they 
were an independent whole and complete in them- 
selves, without mutilating them and altogether 
removing them from the sphere of historical 
study. We cannot do it, indeed, without remoy- 
ing them from the category of life to that of 
mechanics. For in life, and in history which 
mirrors life, there is no such thing as an isolated 
fact: each one must have its due environment, 
and its place in the great unity which is also 
catholicity. 

Even in dealing with the history of such a 
specialised institution as a standing army, we 
cannot be content to deal with “ military ” facts 
only, to the exclusion of all others. Warfare 


Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 3 


itself, which has given rise to standing armies, 
depends upon causes of the most various kinds ; 
upon personal ambition, upon dynastic or religious 
disputes, on commercial or territorial rivalry. 
The existence and well-being of an army depend 
upon agriculture and industry and commerce ; 
the perfection of its weapons is based upon the 
mechanical arts; and its health and its general 
efficiency are conditioned by causes which are 
moral and physical and sanitary, and not strictly 
“military” at all. Thus then not even the 
history of such an institution as this, specialised 
as it is, can be sharply divided off from the 
general stream of life; much less therefore can 
this be done when the connection with that 
stream is more intimate. History was not made, 
nor can it be studied, in disjointed sections, 

The institution with which we are concerned, 
however, is not one which has a merely local or 
temporary interest; it does not belong to one 
particular side of life, or to one particular epoch, 
nor is it bound up with the fortunes of one par- 
ticular nation or race. From any point of view, 
the Church is the most prominent and the most 
significant factor in the history of civilised 
nations ; for good or for evil it has left its mark 
everywhere. If we Christians are right in what 
we believe, the cosmic significance of the Church 
is not less than it appears to be to-day, but 
infinitely greater ; and the relation between the 
Church and the world is more wonderful still. 


4 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


The Church is the home of the new spiritual 
order in the world. But its history is not a 
separate history; it is realised in the course of 
history at large. Spiritual facts can no more be 
isolated than natural facts; for the separation of 
the spiritual from the natural is as much Dualism 
as the worship of Ahriman and Ormuzd; and 
Dualism is the fundamental heresy, as well in 
thought as in worship. 

This being so, we cannot be satisfied with the 
view which would regard ecclesiastical history as 
having to do solely with such things as the succes- 
sion of bishops and the records of councils, dis- 
putes about doctrines and conflicts with heretics, 
We cannot take up the position of those who 
appear to think that if it is concerned at all with 
people at large, it is concerned with their church- 
going and their participation in sacraments only, 
and not with the details of their life as citizens 
and social beings. It is true that the Church isa 
divine society among men, but for that very reason 
it realises its divine life in human history; we 
have a treasure that the world knows not, but we 
have it in earthen vessels. If, on the one hand, 
the kingdom of heaven is likened to a net, it is 
also like unto a grain of mustard seed growing 
secretly ; if the Church is the city of God in the 
world, it is also, as the writer of the Epistle to 
Diognetus has said, in the world “ what a soul is 
ina body.”! Though it be true that “because of 

1 Ep, ad Diogn., c. T. 


Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 5 


the Church the worlds were made,” and that 
“the world stands because of the intercession of 
Christians,” as Aristides says in his Apology,’ yet 
is the history of the Church but part and parcel 
of the general history of mankind. It is realised 
through the same human channels and under the 
same human conditions; it is worked out in the 
ordinary processes and subject to the ordinary 
limitations of natural life. In the light of the In- 
carnation, out of which the Church flows, nothing 
human is foreign to its line of development. 
Ecclesiastical history, then, cannot be isolated 
from history as a whole; it is, in Bishop 
Creighton’s words, “a most important part of 
all history.” It is not the history of one section 
or one element of human life, but of all human 
life as seen from one particular point of view. 
This point of view has, of course, its effect upon 
the whole perspective; things will loom large 
from this point of view which would be compara- 
tively immaterial from a different one, and vice 
versa. ‘The significance of an event from the point 
of view of political or economic history will be no 
measure of its significance from that of ecclesias- 
tical history. But although a fact of the very 
greatest importance from one point of view may 
be of very little importance from another, the 
student soon learns to see, and sees increasingly as 
he goes on, how closely inter-related his facts are, 


1 Apol, Arist., c. 17 (Texts and Studies, Cambridge, 1891, 
vol, I. part 1). 


6 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


and how impossible it is to shut his eyes to any. 
Political considerations have their effect, and a 
very profound and far-reaching effect, upon almost 
every ecclesiastical or even doctrinal situation ; 
both alike are dominated, in a limited degree but 
in a very real sense, by ethnic, social, and economic 
conditions. Nothing, therefore, may be arbitrarily 
neglected or set aside as irrelevant; we are not 
concerned with some of the facts only, but with 
allthe facts. Every circumstance must be allowed 
its due importance, and every consideration its 
proper weight. 

Ecclesiastical history, then, is history regarded 
from a particular point of view, as centred in the 
faith of Christ and summed up in the life of His 
Church. It recognises no limits whatever, other 
than such as are involved in this point of view; 
in Professor Gwatkin’s words, it is “the spiritual 
side of universal history.” Does it then recognise 
any limits of time? is it concerned only with the 
Christian centuries? or can it be said to be con- 
cerned with the events which took place hundreds 
or thousands of years before the Church itself had 
its beginning? Here again the question has been 
answered in very different ways. ‘There are many 
who have confined the name strictly to that 
period which it more particularly suggests, viz. to 
the history of the Christian centuries and of the 
peoples which have entered within the borders of 
the Christian Church. On the other hand, it has 
been used much more loosely. As is well known, 


- 


Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 7 


Dean Stanley held that ecclesiastical history must 
include in its scope the Church of the Old Dis- 
pensation as well as that of the New, and that it 
began with the Call of Abraham ;? and accord- 
ingly he entered upon his duties as Regius 
Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Oxford by 
delivering his noble course of ‘‘ Lectures on the 
History of the Jewish Church.” Nor did Dean 
Stanley stand alone: amongst many more who 
took the same view were the younger Casaubon, 
John Spencer (d. 1693), Dean of Ely and author 
of the famous De legibus Hebraeorum ritualibus,and 
Jean Le Clerc, Professor of Ecclesiastical History 
at Amsterdam and editor of Erasmus’s works. 
The last-named of these, in his inaugural lecture 
at Amsterdam, divided all history into civil and 
ecclesiastical, and defined their respective spheres 
as follows : 

“The first reports the Actions of Commanders 
of Kingdoms and Cities, or of Kings and Nations ; 
and the last the affairs which pass’d formerly 
among the Hebrews, and since our Saviour’s Birth 
among the Christians, as far as Religion is con- 
cern’d in them.” * 

We may say without the least hesitation that 


1 See A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Eastern 
Church, new edition, London 1883, pp. [18}{76]. 

2 An Oration concerning the excellence and usefulness of Ecclesi- 
astical History. Pronounc’d Septemb. 6, 1712. By Mr Le Clerc. 
Translated from the Zatin. London. Printed for 4. Baldwin 
near the Oxford-Arms in Warwick-Lane. M.DCC.XIII. [1 
have been unable to consult the Latin original.] 


8 Study of Ecclesiastical History — 


in one sense even this extended description is not 
too wide but too narrow. Ecclesiastical history 
must not indeed be made to inelude, still less to 
be synonymous with, the history of comparative re- 
ligions: the very basis of its existence as a definite 
study lies in the fact that the Christian religion 
differs in kind and not merely in degree from all 
other religions whatsoever. But it is this unique 
character of Christianity which is the basis of the 
wide range of ecclesiastical history. We need not 
shrink from claiming that it is concerned not only 
with the preparation for Christ in Judaism, but 
with all other early religions and civilisations in 
so far as they shared in that same preparation. 
And we may go farther still, and say that it has 
to do with all else in human history which is 
brought into contact with, or derives its signi- 
ficance from, or finds its interpretation and 
fulfilment in, the Church of Christ. In Arch- 
bishop Benson’s words, “The Old World is with 
the Bible a factor in Church History. The 
History of the World and of the Church will be 
at last identical.”? But this limitation must 
not be lost sight of: they are not identical yet. 
Ecclesiastical history is not merely religious 
history. Nor is it merely Jewish history as con- 
tinued and consummated in Christianity : pace 
Le Clerc, the Old Dispensation does not share in 
it in the same sense as the New. Its centre of 


1 Vigilemus et Oremus, editio altera, London and Lincoln, 
1881, p. 14. 


Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 9 


gravity, so to speak, is neither religion in general 
nor the Bible in particular, but the Incarrate 
Life of Jesus Christ as manifested and perpetuated 
in His Church, and realised by degrees in the 
world through His Spirit. “In a peculiar sense,” 
as Bishop Westcott says, “all history from the 
Day of Pentecost is a sacred history.” 1 

But just because ecclesiastical history sees all 
things in the light of the Incarnation, and from 
the point of view of the Church of Christ, we 
must be the more careful to remember that its 
facts are subject to the same laws as any other 
facts, that the sequence of cause and effect is not 
interrupted, but rather established, because the 
hand of God is at work in a special degree. We 
know indeed by faith what the end of life must 
be, and that it must be good. But we have to 
walk by faith too; and walking by faith implies 
not knowledge but ignorance of many of the 
stages on the way; so that we cannot judge a 
priori what the history of the Church is likely to 
be. We must therefore give ourselves loyally to 
the study of the facts without anticipating them 
by foregone conclusions, and without allowing 
any prepossessions to bias our judgment. No- 
where is there a greater danger of doing this. 
Nowhere is it easier to take sides, and to assume 
that everything is justifiable which took place on 
that side with which our sympathies lie; or at 
any rate to take it for granted that a thoroughly 

1 The Gospel of Life, London, 1892, p. 279. 


10 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


satisfactory explanation can be found for every- 
thifg which is not in accordance with our own 
idea of the fitness of things. We must be pre- 
pared, on the contrary, to find that all that was 
best was defiled with much that was bad, and that 
even the worst was not without elements of good. 
We must be prepared to recognise large elements 
of truth in the contentions of which we least 
approve ; to find at times the spirit of partisanship 
and sectarianism on the side of what was in reality 
larger and better, and a lowly and catholic temper 
in those whose position in effect involved the fatal 
surrender of much of the Catholic heritage. It 
need not surprise us, though it should humble us, 
to find a higher level of conduct in the leaders of 
some secession from the Church than amongst the 
members of the Church at large at the time of 
the secession; or how should we have heard of 
them at all? How else could they have drawn 
followers to themselves but by the attractive force 
of a holy life? but for that, their movements 
would probably have been still-born. It need 
not startle us to find that nearly every heresy 
was bearing witness to some neglected element 
or elements of the truth which perhaps sorely 
needed re-statement, even though the attempt at 
re-statement may be never so crude and arrogant, 
and even though the result have taken such an 
exaggerated and distorted shape, owing to the 
neglect of other necessary elements, that in effect 
partial truth has become total error. In no con- 


Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 11 


troversy, if we study the facts fairly, shall we 
find that either side had a monopoly of good- 
ness or of enlightenment; for the world has yet 
to see the contest (which nevertheless is already 
going on) in which all that is good is ranged on 
one side and all that is evil on the other. There 
is always something to be said on both sides, and 
we cannot always see how much; as Herbert of 
Bosham long ago said with regard to the quarrel 
between Thomas Becket and King Henry II: 
“Both parties had a zeal for God; which zeal 
was most according to knowledge His judgement 
alone can determine.”* Nor does this apply only 
to contests within the Church; the same thing 
holds good of the relations between those within 
the Church and those without. For the faith of 
Christ alters men’s destiny and their important 
status, but does not automatically alter their 
character or their gifts. It places them in a 
position of privilege and gives them the earnest 
of the graces which pertain to that position, but 
it does not at once, or apart from their own effort, 
bring them to maturity: they have to assimilate 
that of which they are made partakers. ‘They 
have to win their souls still, to make them their 
own under the same strenuous discipline of life 
which is common to all men. 

Prepossessions, then, must be rigorously set on 
one side; for the study of ecclesiastical history 


1 Materials for the History of Archbishop Becket, Rolls Series, 
vol, iii. p. 273, 


12 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


is simply the study of all human life from one 
particular point of view. In order to take part 
profitably in this study a man must, of course, be 
able to enter into this point of view. We are 
not, indeed, justified in saying that he must of 
necessity be a Christian in order to take part in 
it: good work in ecclesiastical history has been 
done by some who were not Christians,’ just as 
Christian writers have done good work on the 
history of Islam or of the Indian religions.2 But 
he must, as a most essential part of his equip- 
ment, have such a knowledge and such an appreci- 
ation of the essential idea of the Church, and its 
manifestation in history, as to be able to under- 
stand and enter into the nature of that which he 
is studying. This is a necessary part of his edu- 
cation for that particular work. But having this, 
he does not therefore treat his material in a 
different way from any other student of history ; 
or in so far as he does so he fails to attain his 
real object. The best historical student will 
make the best ecclesiastical historian; i.e. the 
man whose knowledge is greatest, whose judg- 
ment is at once the most active and the most 
cautious, and whose sympathies are at once keenest 
and most carefully kept under control. ‘The story 
is told that on one occasion the Swiss diplomat 

1 For instance, Philipp Jaffé, the editor of the Bibliotheca 
Rerum Germanicarum, and of the first series of Regesta Ponti- 
jicum, was a Jew. 


2 For instance, Sir William Muir, Professor Stanley Lane 
Poole, and Sir M. Monier-Williams. 


Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 13 


Merle d’Aubigné, the author of a History of the 
Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, met Leo- 
pold von Ranke, and claimed acquaintance with 
him as a brother historian. The author of the 
History of the Popes demurred a little, and then 
replied that d’Aubigné wrote as a Protestant 
first and a historian afterwards, whereas in his 
own works he endeavoured to be the historian 
first of all. Setting on one side the greatness 
of the one and the mediocrity of the other, it 
would not be easy to give a better illustration of 
the difference between them. D’Aubigné’s work 
is of course long dead; but even in its own day, 
and even from the point of view of the most 
militant Protestantism, it was immeasurably in- 
ferior in value to von Ranke’s work, simply be- 
cause the one is true history and the other is the 
evil thing which is sometimes spoken of as “ his- 
tory with a purpose.” It would be easy to give 
more conspicuous instances of this evil than 
dAubigné; but for the particular object which 
we have in view it is unnecessary, and the illustra- 
tion is all the better because it does not repre- 
sent an extreme case. 


On the subject of this chapter, reference may be 
made to The Meaning of Ecclesiastical History, an 
inaugural lecture by Professor H. M. Gwatkin (Cam- 
bridge, 1891); to an essay on “ Methods and Results 
in Modern Theology,” by the present writer, at the 
beginning of vol, xxxiii of the Encyclopaedia Britan- 


14 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


nica (tenth edition, London, 1902); and to Dean 
Stanley’s three “ Lectures Introductory to the Study 
of Ecclesiastical History,’’ prefixed to his Lectures on 
the History of the Eastern Church, London, 1861 (many 
subsequent editions). 


CHAPTER II 
THE SCIENCE OF HISTORY 


Tue student of ecclesiastical history, for whom 
this little manual is more particularly intended, 
may perhaps not have the opportunity of doing 
much in the way of historical research on his own 
account. He will be concerned rather with modern 
works than with original documents, and with 
the results of the historical researches of others 
rather than with the processes by which such 
results have been obtained. Nevertheless, if he 
is to direct his own reading to the best advantage, 
he ought to have some idea of what history actu- 
ally means. He should also know something at 
any rate of the methods of historical research, 
both because in that way alone can he learn to 
appreciate rightly the results to which those who 
make use of them have been led, and because he 
himself, in all his reading even of modern authors, 
must make use more or less efficiently, and mutatis 
mutandis, of these very same methods. In the 
next three chapters, therefore, we shall in the 
first place deal with the nature of history itself, 
and then shall endeavour to sketch in outline 
those methods of study —— as we have already 


16 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


seen, are not the peculiar possession of the ecclesi- 
astical historian, but are common to all students 
of history. 


cP 


In the first place, we must lay all possible stress 
upon the fact that history is a true science, and 
that, as Professor J. B. Bury has recently re- 
minded us, it is in no sense a branch of literature. 
It differs indeed both in method and in scope 
from certain other sciences, as we shall see pre- 
sently; it has its own subject-matter, its own 
laws, and its own methods of investigation and 
verification. But these are based on general 
principles, not merely on individual preferences ; 
and within its own limits history is as truly 
scientific as any study can possibly be. The fact 
must be borne in mind. Most people nowadays 
would recognise that a man who has not studied 
the rudiments of any particular science is incap- 
able of dealing profitably with questions which 
presuppose a knowledge of the principles and 
methods of that science. But there is still a 
widespread idea that certain subjects, historical 
and theological subjects in particular, are the 
happy hunting-ground of the tyro, and that any 
man of ordinary intelligence is perfectly capable 
of expressing weighty opinions in such matters 
without any special study or research. Such 
ideas rest upon a radical misunderstanding of 

1 In his Inaugural Lecture at Cambridge, 1903. 


The Science of History 17 


what history actually means. It is of course true 
that history depends to a larger extent than 
some other studies upon literary expression. The 
historian cannot tabulate his conclusions, or ex- 
hibit them in the shape of prepared specimens 
or diagrams or mathematical formulae, simply 
because they represent life itself and not merely 
the mechanical coefficient of life, and therefore 
must be expressed in terms of life and not merely 
in terms of matter and motion. For this reason 
if for no other (and that there are other reasons 
every lover of literature will recognise) the modern 
tendency to neglect literary form in historical 
writing, which has had such disastrous results in 
Germany and is by no means unknown elsewhere, 
is very greatly to be deplored. Nevertheless, from 
this point of view, literature is the handmaiden 
of history; and history, in Professor York 
Powell’s words, is not and never can be merely “a 
pretty but rather difficult branch of literature.” 

** A history book is not necessarily good if it 
appears to the literary critic ‘readable and in- 
teresting, nor bad because it seems to him ‘ hard 
or heavy reading.’ The literary critic, in fact, 
is beginning to find out that he reads a history 
as he might read a treatise on mathematics or 
linguistics, at his peril, and that he is no judge 
of its value or lack of value. Only the expert can 
judge that.”? 

1 In his preface to Langlois and Seignobos, Jntroduction to 
the Study of History, London, 1898, p. v. 

B 


18 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


I 


If we are asked for our justification of the 
claim that there is such a thing as scientific 
history, our answer must be that history itself 
is nothing but the application of the scientific 
method, i.e. the method of induction, for the 
determination of that which was previously un- 
known and otherwise unknowable. It has nothing 
to do (that is, so far as it is truly historical) with 
a priori reasoning ; it assumes nothing and takes 
nothing for granted, but works from the known 
to the unknown in accordance with fixed and 
definite laws. In other words, it makes use of 
precisely the same inductive method which has 
led to all our modern triumphs in natural science. 
In the case of natural science, indeed, the end 
which is sought is general law, whereas in that of 
history it is particular fact; but in either case it 
is one which is incapable of attainment by logical 
proof, and which can only be reached as the 
result of a process of induction and synthesis. 
The two methods are substantially the very same, 
though applied under different circumstances. 
In one sense, indeed, we may even say that the 
inductive method in physical science is only one 
special form of the historical method, since it 
does not base its generalisations upon merely 
external resemblances but endeavours to discover 
and set forth the order of historical development 
which underlies the phenomena of the universe. 


The Science of History 19 


From this point of view history may be described 
as the meeting point of all the sciences. And 
it would be making no unreal or baseless claim 
on behalf of history to say that the real secret of 
all, or nearly all, of the progress which has been 
made in our own day in almost every study, 
physical or metaphysical, is to be found in the 
fact that they have all become increasingly 
historical in their method. 


III 


If now we proceed to compare the science of 
history with other sciences, we at once observe 
that its data are, in some respects at any rate, 
unlike those of the natural sciences. In these 
latter, the facts are as a rule capable of direct 
observation and verification. Although they are 
frequently taken on trust, on the evidence of pre- 
vious observers in the case of things past, and on 
the evidence of eyewitnesses in the case of things 
afar off, they can in most cases be tested and 
re-tested whenever it is thought desirable. With 
history it is different; the facts are not capable 
of direct observation or verification, simply be- 
cause they are facts of the past. ‘To the student 
of natural science, again (excepting in so far as 
he is at work upon “ applied science”), the actual 
facts are important chiefly as the manifestation 
of particular Jaws, and have no value in them- 
selves excepting in their bearing upon other facts 


20 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


which happen to be the subject of investigation. 
With the historian, on the contrary, the facts 
themselves have a value; and, indeed, his chief 
object is to get into actual contact with things as 
they actually happened, to see the past as though 
it were present. He works not with facts, but 
with documents. He starts from evidence of one 
kind and another, ample or fragmentary, designed 
or undesigned, contemporary or belated, and he 
endeavours to ascertain as best he may what 
actually happened. In other words, “ the docu- 
ment is his starting point, the fact his goal;”* 
and the work of the historian is comprehended in 
the complicated process, or series of processes, of 
investigation and sifting, of induction and in- 
ference, of reconstruction and combination, by 
which the result is reached. 

It follows, of course, from what has been said 
that there are certain distinct limitations in the 
sphere of historical knowledge: (1) its evidence 
cannot produce in us the same degree of certainty 
with regard to any particular fact that direct 
evidence can, and (2) its results cannot have the 
same kind of fixity and finality as the results of 
natural science. It must be borne in mind, how- 
ever, that this does not so much imply that there 
is a greater degree of improbability with regard to 
historic truth, as that the subject is one in which 
any other degree of certainty is in the nature of 


1 Langlois and Seignobos, Introduction to the Study of 
History, p. 64. 


The Science of History 21 


the case unattainable. (1) As regards the first of 
the limitations mentioned above, it is of course 
clear that testimony, however trustworthy, cannot 
produce in our minds the same kind of conviction 
as direct observation, seeing that the testimony 
itself ultimately rests on observation. But the 
fact remains that testimony is the only material 
that we can have for the investigation of the 
history of the past. If then the past record of 
the human race be worthy of study at all (and 
this no believer in the Incarnation, at any rate, 
can doubt), we must be content with the kind of 
knowledge which is appropriate to it, and which 
from the very nature of the case is alone possible 
in it; just as we have to investigate the chemistry 
of the sun without the aid of the direct methods 
which we can use in terrestrial chemistry. More- 
over, it must be remembered that this kind of 
knowledge (knowledge resting on “probable 
evidence”) is after all that upon which all our 
ordinary concepts are built up and all our every 
day actions are based: that, in Bishop Butler’s 
pregnant phrase, “'To us, probability is the very 
guide of life.” And once more, it must be re- 
membered that after all the essential difference 
between probable evidence and demonstrative 
evidence is qualitative rather than quantitative: 
it is not that the former is weak whilst the latter 
is strong, but that whilst the latter is invariable, 
the former “admits of degrees, and of all variety 
of them, from the highest moral certainty to the 


22 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


very lowest presumption.”? ‘There are things of 
which we cannot feel at all sure; there are others of 
which we feel almost as sure as if they were the 
subject of formal proof. (2) As regards the latter 
limitation, it is quite true that we cannot be so 
sure of the results of history, which are a series of 
concrete facts, as we can of those of the natural 
sciences, which are as a rule abstract laws. But 
although we so commonly forget that it is so, itis 
none the less the case that all our knowledge is 
relative, not absolute, and that in every sphere it 
is a knowledge which corresponds with the nature 
of its subject-matter; that abstract and concrete 
thinking are two distinct things, and that we can 
never have the same kind of knowledge as regards 
concrete life as we can in matters of thought; 
that “‘as we gain exactness we lose contact with 
actuality.”* Moreover, the results of historical 
processes have at times a fixity which is not 
remotely akin to those of processes in natural 
science. In history, our conclusions are to be 
found at the point of meeting of different 
though converging lines of evidence, derived from 
documentary sources of the most varied character. 
If this cumulative evidence be sufficiently varied 
and weighty, the conclusions which we base upon 


1 Bishop Butler, Analogy: the opening sentence of the 
Introduction. For an analysis of the degrees of belief, see 
W. Thomson, Outline of the Laws of Thought, § 120. 

2 See a very valuable chapter on “ The Distinction between 
Abstract and Concrete Knowledge” in J. R. Illingworth, 
Reason and Revelation, London, 1902, pp. 41-64. 


The Science of History 23 


it may be, and often are, so fixed and sure that 
any other conclusion would be absolutely incon- 
ceivable, unless all our methods and all our results 
are to be regarded as nugatory, and history itself 
to be repudiated as a meaningless sham. Some- 
times, too, the historical conclusion to which we 
have been led by the consideration of the evidence 
reflects back light upon the whole of the other 
facts within our sphere of vision, in such a way as 
to make their entire meaning far plainer than it 
was before, and thus to clinch the whole argument. 
In such a case, whilst it is still necessary to be on 
our guard against the tendency to think that the 
‘law ” which we have discovered, so to speak (ze. 
the assured sequence of events which we have 
observed), is anything more than a partial one, 
based upon what is only an imperfect summary of 
the facts, shall we be wrong in holding that we 
have solved the problem before us in just the same 
way as the natural scientist has done when he dis- 
covers the “law” which underlies the phenomena 
which he has been engaged in explaining? And 
if so, are we not right in claiming that history 
is just as truly scientific as any of the natural 
sciences ? 


IV 


History then has its place by the side of the 
natural sciences in spite of the fact that it cannot 
be regarded as one of the “sciences of observa- 
tion.” But there is another respect in which it 


24 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


differs in toto from them; viz., in that it has usually 
to do with elements of an altogether different 
character. History is mainly concerned with 
human action ; and this would be meaningless and 
inconsequent apart from the motives upon which it 
is based and the ideas which underlie it. Unless 
human action be rational in this sense it is hard 
to see how there can be either object or method 
in historical study ; apart from this, history would 
not be worthy of study at all. It is quite true, 
of course, that the historian may not introduce 
transcendental causes to account for his facts; 
nor may he write history on the basis of some 
foregone conclusion as to the progress of the 
human race, as most of the authors of “ philoso- 
phies of history” have done; nor may he inter- 
pret the facts by some arbitrary theory of 
physical or metaphysical causes as Buckle and 
Taine have done; nor may he adopt a purely 
partisan position and see his facts through a lens 
which at once distorts and colours them, like 
Macaulay or (on a far lower level) Theiner and 
Janssen. Again, it is not the function of the 
historian, as such, to pronounce abstract ethical 
judgments; nor is he called upon to arraign his 
characters before the tribunal of the moral stan- 
dards of his own country or period, and to award 
praise or blame. Nevertheless, he is called upon 
to understand and to appreciate motives as well 
as acts, to see what is done in the light of the 
standards of those who took part in it, and of the 


The Science of History 25 


causes which prompted them both consciously and 
unconsciously. He need have no theory on the 
subject; he must keep his belief on the subject, 
if he have any, under a rigid control ; but he must 
none the less remember that in sober fact there 
are moral and intellectual waves in human life 
just as truly as there are fashions in dress. He 
need not personify the spirit of the age, and may 
not introduce it as a means of accounting for his 
facts; but he only shows his blindness if he fails 
to see that such a spirit, call it what he will, is 
manifested in the facts. His work, therefore, will 
be valuable and lasting in proportion as he is able to 
enter into the character of the age with which he is 
dealing, and to understand the persons with whom 
he has to deal by the light of their own standards 
and those of their day. Ina word, he must re- 
member that the facts which are the end of his pro- 
cesses are not dead but living facts, that they have 
a moral character which cannot be ignored without 
altering their essential nature, and that the agents 
with whose activities he has to deal belong to a 
higher order than that of merely animal life. 
Once more, he need have no theory as to the differ- 
ence between the two: but he must recognise the 
fact that the data with which he is concerned can- 
not be expressed (from his point of view at any 
rate) in the terms of the data of natural science.1 


1 Needless to say, all this is still more true with regard 
to ecclesiastical history, the standpoint of which is farthest 
removed from that of the purely natural order. 


26 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


What we have been saying is well expressed in 
the following passage : 

“Historical science is radically different from 
the natural sciences in that it has to deal with 
purposive units. Physics, Chemistry, and Biology 
are concerned with the co-ordination of things 
and appearances, the What and the How. His- 
tory must needs have a wider scope; the tabula- 
tion of fact is essential, the What and the How 
must be known; but this is not the end; the Why 
cannot be excluded. History deals with men as 
men of thought and purpose, and it is incomplete 
until the thought and purpose of those who make 
history are interpreted by those who write it,”? 

Thus, then, history has its point of contact with 
natural science on the one hand, and with the 
moral sciences on the other. In its methods it 
more closely resembles the former, in its subject- 
matter it approximates to the latter. Those who 
deny the name of science to ethics and meta- 
physics are doubtless perfectly logical in refusing 
it to that part of historical study which has for 
its object the investigation of motives and ideals 
and the realisation of the moral atmosphere of 
past days. Even so, however, it is hard to see 
how they can reasonably refuse it to all that con- 
cerns the actual reconstruction of the facts of the 
past, if it be given to geology or palaeontology. 
And if the name be rightly given to the natural 


1 W. B. Frankland, Zhe Early Eucharist, Cambridge, 1902, 
pl. 


The Science of History 27 


and moral sciences, it would seem to belong 
a fortiori to history, which in so many respects 
shares the character of both. 


For further study on the subject of this chapter : 

E. Bernheim, Lehrbuch der historische Methode, 
Leipzig, new edition, 1903. With a very 
full bibliography. 

C. V. Langlois and C. Seignobos, Introduction aux 
études historiques (second edition), Paris, 1898 
(English translation of the first edition by 
G. G. Berry, with preface by Prof. York 
Powell, London, 1898). 

C. and V. Mortet, La Science de Uhistoire, Paris, 
1894. 

P. Lacombe, De I’ Histoire considérée comme science, 
Paris, 1894. 

N. Marselli, La scienga della storia, Torino, 1873. 

The Discours de la Méthode of René Descartes is 
eminently worthy of study. (Many editions ; 
a good translation by J. Veitch, ninth edition, 
Edinburgh, 1887.) 


CHAPTER III 
HISTORICAL METHOD 


Ir is not enough that history should vindicate its 
right to be considered a true science; for a great 
deal of mere empiricism masquerades under that 
august name. ‘The historical method is not 
always to be recognised in so-called historical 
work, just as the scientific method is not always 
to be found in so-called scientific circles; and the 
scientific spirit is unfortunately not always to be 
recognised amongst those who think that they 
fulfil its requirements most adequately, whether 
they be students of history or anything else. 
With the best will in the world we are hardly 
likely to be successful in altogether avoiding un- 
scientific haste and prejudice; with the very 
greatest care our practice will not attain to the 
accuracy or the precision of our theory. There 
is all the greater need that we should place before 
ourselves, as simply and as explicitly as possible, 
the claims which scientific method makes upon 
the student of history. 

The work of the historian may be summed up 
under two heads: first, there is a process of 
analysis; and secondly, one of synthesis. It will 

28 


Historical Method—1 29 


be well to consider these two separately, and the © 
former of them will form the subject of the present 
chapter. 


Tue Work or ANALYsIS 
I 


The first task which must be undertaken in 
the investigation of the history of any period 
is the collection of material. 'This may be of all 
kinds: actual vestiges of the past, pictures, en- 
gravings, inscriptions, laws, canons, state papers, 
letters, narratives of eye-witnesses, chronicles, 
poems, sermons, treatises, and so forth, accord- 
ing to the nature of the subject. Evidence of 
this kind is of course scattered far and wide; but 
amongst the most available storehouses of it may 
be mentioned the following: 

(a) The great collections of printed documents 
which have been edited by the scholars of former 
days, such as Rymer’s Foedera, London, 1704— 
1723 (new edition, Hagae Comitum, 1739-1745), 
Martene and Durand’s Scriptorum et Monu- 
mentorum amplissima Collectio, Paris, 1724-1733 ; 
Mabillon’s Acta Sanctorum ordinis S. Benedicti, 
Paris, 1733-1738; Muratori’s Rerum Italicarum 
Scriptores, Milan, 1723-1751; Bouquet’s Recueil 
des historiens des Gaules et de la France, Paris, 
1738 f.; the great collection of the Concilia by 
Labbe and Cossart, Harduin, and Mansi; the 
Bollandist Acta Sanctorum, Paris and Brussels, 


30 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


1749 f.; Niebuhr’s Corpus Scriptorum Historiae 
Byzantinae, Bonn, 1828 f.; Migne’s Patrologia 
Latina and Patrologia Graeca, and the like. 

(6) The chronicles, &c., published by various 
learned societies, such as the Société de lhistoire 
de France, the Société de lhistoire de Belgique, 
the Societa Romana di Storia Patria, the Spalding 
Club, the Irish Archaeological and Celtic Societies, 
the English Historical, Surtees, Camden, and 
Chetham Societies, and many more. 

(c) Above all, the many noble series of State 
Papers and other Monwmenta which are being 
issued by the chief governments of Europe or by 
Academies subsidised by them: such as the Chron- 
icles and Memorials published in the Rolls Series ; 
the works issued by the Record Commission, the 
Historical Manuscripts Commission, the Commis- 
sion Royale dhistoire de Belgique, the (Danish) 
Aarsberetninger fra K. Geheime-Archivet, and 
the Kongliga Samfundet for Utgivanda af Hand- 
skrifter rérande Skandinaviens Historia; the 
Monumenta Historiae Germaniae, the Fontes Rerum 
Austriacarum, the Italian Monumenta Historiae 
Patriae and Archivio Storico; the Coleccién de 
documentos ineditos para la historia de Espana, 
and the Corpo Diplomatico Portuguez. Or again, 
the Vienna Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum 
Latinorum, the similar collections of Greek writers 
now in course of publication at Berlin, and of 
Syriac writers which is just commencing (1903) 
at Paris; the Corpus Reformatorum published 


Historical Method—l1 31 


at Brunswick ; the Bullarum Magnum now appear- 
ing at Turin, and the great collections of inscrip- 
tions of all kinds (Corpus inscriptionum Atticarum, 
Graecarum, Indicarum, Latinarum, &c.), which 
are being published by the Royal Prussian 
Academy. ‘These are but specimens of the larger 
collections; but in addition to what is contained 
in them, there is an immense amount of material 
available only in smaller collections, or published 
in single volumes, or scattered through various 
periodicals. In addition to this a very large 
amount, existing in libraries public and private, is 
still unpublished and even uncatalogued ; whilst for 
many periods the material at our disposal is being 
added to almost every year by fresh discoveries. 
The process of finding what we want amidst 
this immense mass of material is naturally no 
easy one. But it is greatly facilitated by the 
fact that every student stands, as it were, on the 
shoulders of his predecessors; he avails himself 
of the work which they have already done, makes 
use of their guidance in finding materials, and pro- 
fits (or should do so) by their accumulated experi- 
ence. Much help, moreover, is to be obtained from 
the transactions of the various national historical 
and local archaeological societies, and from the 
various historical magazines and reviews at home 
and abroad (English Historical Review, Archiv 
fiir Geschichte and Neues Archiv, Boletin de 
la historia, Historische Zeitschrift [Miimich], 
Historisk Tidsskrift (Christiania, and Copen- 


32 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


hagen], Revista de Espana, Revue critique (histoire 
et de la littérature, Revue historique, Zeitschrift 
Sir Kirchengeschichte, Analecta Bollandiana, and 
the like). Most useful of all, amongst printed 
works, are a number of systematic bibliographies ; 
two of the most important of which are the 
Bibliographie der deutschen Zeitschriften-Litteratur 
and the Bibliographie historique de la France, now 
in course of publication, the Quellenkunde der 
deutschen Geschichte of F. C. Dahlmann, G. Waitz, 
and E. Steindorff (Géttingen, 1894), and C. Gross, 
Sources and Literature of English History, London, 
1900. For material which is still unpublished we 
have a number of catalogues and calendars, chief 
amongst which may be mentioned the English 
Calendars of State Papers and the Appendices to 
the Reports of the Historical MSS. Commission, 
and the great French Catalogue générale des 
manuscripts des bibliothéques publiques des dé- 
partements. But a vast amount of the manuscript 
material which is known to exist still remains 
uncatalogued, and especially that part of it which 
is in private libraries; and the practice which has 
very frequently prevailed, by which single students 
have been allowed to grope about in them and 
carry away whatever they could find, or make use 
of for their particular work, is for this purpose 
useless, if not worse. So that our task is not 
approaching its end. The student of history 
can never be sure, any more than the student 
of natural science can, that he has made use of all 


Mstorical Method—I 33 


the evidence that there is.1 He may easily over- 
look some parts of the available material through 
carelessness or haste, or through lack of training, 
or through lack of linguistic ability, or because 
there is not yet sufficient co-operation amongst 
historical scholars to enable the ground to be 
covered properly, where individual work cannot 
cover it. And even if it were possible to avoid 
all these pitfalls, the field may still at any moment 
be widened by the discovery of fresh evidence. 
This is happening continually. In early Church 
history, for instance, within recent years, we have 
had the Didache, the Testamentum Domini, the 
Sacramentary of Sarapion, and a great many 
apocalyptic writings; and there is every prospect 
of much more. 


II 


The next step that the student must undertake 
is the examination of the documents which he has 
obtained. He must take them one by one and 
examine and appraise them as carefully as he 
can. Is this a faithful text or is it corrupt? is it 


1JIn reviewing a book by Robert Vaughan on Revolutions 
in English History (1859), Charles Kingsley expressed the 
opinion that future works on English history were likely to 
take the same shape and to deal with special aspects of 
English life, since the time had almost come when the facts 
of English history were ascertained, so that there would be 
no more to be done in that direction. We have not found it 
so yet! The fact need not change our opinion of Kingsley’s 
greatness in other ways, but it does not give us confidence in 
the system of ministerial recommendation which made him 
Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge. 
Cc 


oe a ie 
ee): Me 


. “ 
« 


34 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


really the work of the author to whom it is 
ascribed ? was he a contemporary witness? if not, 
when did he live? when did he write? what were 
his opportunities of knowing the facts? was he 
biassed, and, if so, in what direction? did he 
write with a purpose, and, if so, what purpose? 
What can be learned on these points from in- 
ternal, and what from external evidence? and 
do the conclusions agree to which these two re- 
spectively lead? Such are the questions which 
must be asked with regard to each document; 
and the answers to these questions, so far as they 
can be ascertained, must henceforward be borne 
constantly in mind in dealing with the document 
concerned. Here, again, much of the necessary 
work has been done already. Most authors, and 
a considerable number of single works, have been 
made the subject of minute and careful examina- 
tion, the results of which may be found in the 
prolegomena of modern editions, or in the articles 
in the great dictionaries and encyclopaedias.” It 
is therefore possible with comparatively little 
trouble to obtain fairly exact answers to most of 
these questions. But the student may not accept 

1 Amongst the most valuable of these may be mentioned 
Bishop J. B. Lightfoot’s monumental edition of the 4 
Fathers (London, 1885-1890), and (so far as the text is con- 
cerned) G. Hartel’s edition of St Cyprian (Corpus Script. Eecl. 
Lat., 3 vols, Vienna, 1868). 

2 For a list of the chief works of this class see below, p. 141. 

3 The best illustration of work of this kind, for the pur- 
poses of the historian, is to be found in Bishop W. Stubbs’s: 


Historical Prefaces to Chronicles, d&c., in the Rolls Series, 
Oxford, 1902. 


Historical Method—I 35 


the conclusions of others too readily, and must 
never relax his own vigilance because the work 
seems to have been done already. Every few years 
sees the overthrow of some old conclusion, the 
formation of a more exact estimate of the value 
of some important document or a revision of the 
accepted theory as to its authorship or date; and 
every increase of our knowledge in this as in 
other directions has been the outcome of the 
working of a critical mind, which could not be 
content to accept other people’s opinions at 
second-hand. There are large numbers of writ- 
ings which were formerly accepted as genuine, and 
are now known to be forgeries; on the other 
hand, there are some which were formerly the 
object of grave suspicion, and which are now 
universally accepted. Of the former class the 
Chronicle of Ingulf and the Pragmatic Sanction of 
St Lewis are well-known instances, not to speak of 
the pseudo-Isidorian Decretals and the Donation 
of Constantine ; of the latter we may mention the 
seven Letters of St Ignatius of Antioch, and 
(although this latter was not by any means so 
widely suspected) the Bull Unam _ Sanctam. 
Critical work of this kind is still being done; 
for instance, Harnack has recently proved, almost 
to demonstration, that the so-called “ Pfaffian 
fragments of St Irenaeus,” the genuineness of 
which was hardly doubted, were in reality the 


1 Dr Bernheim (op. cit., ed. 1903, pp. 301 f.) gives a lengthy 
list of such documents. 


36 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


work of Christoph Matthius Pfaff himself, who 
professed to have discovered them in the library 
at Turin.! Plainly, then, we may not be sure 
that all our material is what it seems. 

It must not be supposed, however, that our 
task is done when it is known that a particular 
work is genuine or spurious ; that the writer was a 
contemporary or a man who lived a hundred years 
after the event ; that he was a guileless and truth- 
loving chronicler or a zealous and unscrupulous 
partisan. ‘The former will not show that we 
can believe all that he tells us, the latter will 
not mean that we can throw his work into the 
waste-paper basket; they are merely important 
facts which must be borne carefully in mind when 
we come to consider what he actually says. It is, 
of course, true that a contemporary writer is of 
greater value than a later one. But a contem- 
porary witness is not always right, and a later 
writer is not always wrong. ‘The former may not 
be able “to see the wood for the trees”; he may 
be misled by his very proximity to the events 
which he describes; or by the fact that he sees 
things too exclusively from one point of view; or 
he may be so overpowered by it all that when he 
begins to put pen to paper he can produce nothing 
but vague declamation or vituperation. Now as 
to the later writer. It is true that so far as he is 
a mere copyist of material which we still possess 


1 Texte wnd Untersuchungen, neue Folge, vol. v. part 3, 
Leipzig, 1900. 


Historical Method—I 37 


he has no value for us. But he may turn out to 
be a born historian who could gather and sift and 
weigh} or he may have epitomised or made use of 
earlier materials which are now lost, like Eutropius 
and Sulpitius Severus.’ 

Nor does it follow that a document is useless 
because the writer is not free from bias. It is, 
of course, true that we can more often trust the 
statement of a straightforward and unbiassed 
person than we can that of a dishonest and _pre- 
judiced one; but the former is not always accurate, 
and the latter is not always lying or deceived. 
Every class of men has its own characteristic 
form of mental blindness; placid serenity is no 
exception, nor is there any more prejudiced person, 
as a rule, than the man with what he calls an 
“open mind.” On the other hand, fanaticism 
sometimes has a clear-sightedness which is all its 
own; and even when we find no signs of truth in 
what it has to tell us, the thing itself is neverthe- 
less a historical fact of the most momentary kind. 
Every such fact has its value, and none may be 
neglected. If we were writing a history of our own 
times, there are certain smooth and respectable 
newspapers which might perhaps be ignored; but 
we could not safely ignore the existence, or the 
contents, of those of the most violent and extreme 

1 The latter writer appears to be making use of a lost 
book of the Histories of Tacitus in his account of the de- 
struction of Jerusalem (Chron., lib. ii. c. 30). He also made 


use of the Acts of Peter (R. A. Lipsius, Die apokryphen 
Apostelgeschichten, Brunswick, 1883, vol. ii. p. 331 f.). 


> 


38 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


type. And so with regard to other periods. It 
would be hard to find a more violent and prejudiced 
writer than Lactantius, but we could not possibly 
dispense with his evidence; and his bias is so 
open and transparent that it suffices to put the 
discriminating student on his guard. 

And once more, even where a document has 
been proved to be an absolute forgery, it is not 
accurate to say that it is of no historical value 
whatever. It has of course no connection of any 
real kind with the period to which it professes to 
belong, but it may be of no little value when 
restored to its true environment. The Apostolical 
Constitutions and the pseudo-Isidorian Decretals 
tell us nothing new concerning the age of the 
Apostles and of the early Roman bishops respec- 
tively; but they are historical documents of great 
value for the latter part of the fourth century and 
the middle of the ninth century, when they were, 
respectively, composed and compiled. The ro- 
mances of Turpin are not an authority for the 
age of Karl the Great, but they have their place 
in the history of the twelfth century. The forged 
chronicle of Ingulf still has its value for a student 
who knows that it comes to us from a little before 
or after 1300. The forgeries of William Henry 
Ireland tell us nothing new about Shakespeare, 
but they have their importance for his own 
period. The “ Rowley Papers” are a sad and 
significant historical document of the eighteenth 
century, though they tell us nothing of the period 


Mistorical Method—I 39 


of the Wars of the Roses; and not less signifi- 
cant are the forgeries of Simonides, Schapira, and 
Piggott in the nineteenth century. 

So then, in a word, documents are to be studied 
not primarily with a view to their external charac- 
ter, but with a view to what they have to tell us. 
Questions of authorship and the like are important, 
but they are not the only important questions; 
when we have solved them by means of internal 
and external evidence we are in a position to go 
further and to ask not only by whom and under 
what circumstances the document was written, but 
what it actually contains. 


Il 


This then is the work upon which the student 
now enters. The documents being such as they 
are, what have they to tell him? Their contents 
consist of a series of statements of fact, or what 
profess to be such, and all these need to be 
sifted and tested. He therefore takes the 
documents, breaks them up into their component 
parts, and considers these separately and together, 
bearing in mind that they are not facts, but 
merely the statements from which the facts have 
to be determined. He examines and weighs each 
statement as carefully as possible, both in itself 
and in conjunction with all the rest, and passes 
his judgement at length as the result of a consider- 
ation of all the evidence. Many facts can of 
course be accepted as certain almost at once; for 


40 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


instance, the existence of such a person, the per- 
petration of such an act, and the like, But 
nothing may be allowed to settle itself mechani- 
cally, so to speak; nothing may be taken for 
granted (at this stage) without a distinct and 
definite act of themind. Even where the bulk of 
the authorities are in agreement it does not follow 
that they are in the right; what “everybody 
says” is not necessarily true, and especially is this 
the case where the event is one which everybody 
has expected, or where it is the interest of those 
in power to make it appear that such a thing has 
happened. In cases such as these, “secret his- 
tory,” such as the Anecdota of Procopius, has no 
little importance; hesitation or innuendo on the 
part of narrators is often very significant; and 
the silence of persons who were in a position to 
know what actually happened may itself be an 
important fact1 Again, examination will fre- 
quently show that identical statements in two 
writers are in reality the result of copying; in 
which case, of course, the statement of the later 
writer, unless he has had other opportunities of 
corroborating the statement which he adopted in 
reality, adds nothing whatever to the evidence.? 

1 On the other hand, nothing is more difficult than to in- 
terpret evidence of this kind rightly, and nowhere are the 
chances of error greater, 

2¥or example, the ecclesiastical historians Socrates and 
Sozomen are often quoted as distinct authorities by writers 
who ought to know better, when in reality they are nothing 
of the kind. Sozomen made use of the history of Socrates 


and incorporates long passages from it. Here he isa mere 
copyist: elsewhere, of course, he is an original authority. 


Mstorical Method—I 41 


On the other hand, when the story of a later 
writer is a variant of that which is contained in 
earlier authorities, or when he gives additional 
details, it does not follow that we are in the 
presence of a fresh witness. A story is apt to 
grow as it is repeated from mouth to mouth, as 
everybody is aware who has played at the game 
called “Russian scandal”; and the additional 
facts may be merely “details added to give an 
air of verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and 
unconvincing narrative.” 

Only experience and common sense, however, 
can possibly teach the student how to weigh 
and test evidence such as this; and although 
a great deal may be reduced to precept, we can 
never lay down any absolute and conclusive rule 
for the interpretation of evidence. ‘The work 
can never be done mechanically or by rote; there 
must always be exceptions, and in the last resort 
the student must judge for himself. Take for 
instance such a thing as the “argument from 
silence”: when may it be concluded, from the 
silence of a witness, that a fact did not occur, 
or a practice did not exist? Nobody nowadays 
would fall into the error of the author of Super- 
natural Religion, who ventured glibly to say that 
one after another of the early Fathers “knew no- 
thing of” this or that or the other, because he did 
not happen to mention it in the works which have 
come down to us, quite irrespective of the fact 
that there was no reason why he should. ‘This 


. eee ee 


pip 


42 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


method of reasoning has been exposed and dis- 
credited for good and all by Bishop Lightfoot." 
Nevertheless, it is no easy thing to state with 
strict accuracy when the argument can be used 
conclusively. MM. Langlois and Seignobos, for 
instance, perhaps the two most scientific writers 
on the subject, tell us that the “negative argu- 
ment” or argument from silence is only of force 
when : 

(1) The author of the document in which 
the fact is not mentioned had the intention of 
systematically recording all the facts of the same 
class, and must have been acquainted with all of 
them. (Tacitus sought to enumerate the peoples 
of Germany; the Notitia Dignitatum mentioned 
all the provinces of the Empire; the absence. 
from these lists of a people or a province proves 
that it did not then exist.) (2) ‘The fact, if 
it was such, must have affected the author’s 
imagination so forcibly as necessarily to enter 
into his conceptions. (If there had been regular 
assemblies of the Frankish people, Gregory of 
Tours could not have conceived and described 
the life of the Frankish kings without mentioning 
them.) ”? . 

This looks precise enough, and yet it is easy 
to see that we have not eliminated one most 

1 Essays on Supernatural Religion, London, 1889: the . 
essay on “The Argument from Silence.” 

2 Introduction to the Study of History, p. 256. Cf. P. de 


Smedt, Principes de la Critique Historique, Liége and Paris, 
1883, pp. 236-7. 


Historical Method—I 43 


important source of possible mistake: that of 
simple error or forgetfulness. And yet either of 
these may easily occur, as an example will show. 
A good many years ago there was published 
in England the first edition of an elementary 
manual of mineralogy, by a writer who probably 
knows more about tin ores, and the lodes in which 
they occur, than anybody living; and yet it 
happened that, in the list of metals which was 
given at the beginning of the volume, tin was 
omitted! In this case we are not tempted to 
apply the argument from silence, and to conclude 
that tin was not known in 1873, because the 
point is easy of verification; and yet the case 
satisfies our authors’ criteria. Again, a contem- 
porary account of the consecration of Cornelius 
as Bishop of Rome in a.p. 251, the object of which 
was to show that he was a true Bishop of Rome, 
declares that he was “ made bishop by ( factus est 

. de) the judgement of God and His Christ, 
by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the 
suffrages of the people who were present,” &c.,} 
but does not mention the actual laying on of 
hands. Here again we are not inclined to doubt 
whether the laying on of hands was essential to 
the making of a bishop, for the point is capable 
of abundant verification in the literature of the 
time, and we have other evidence of the actual 


1 §. Cypr. Zp. lv. 6. Cyprian has previously said, however, 
that Cornelius was ‘‘made a bishop by (factus est episcopus a) 
many of our colleagues who were then in Rome. 


44 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


consecration of Cornelius. Once more, of two 
tracts commonly ascribed to St Ambrose, and 
both dealing with the Eucharist, De Mysteriis 
and De Sacramentis, one actually mentions the 
consecration, and the other does not happen to 
do so; but the evidence on the subject is so clear 
that no sane person would venture to suggest that 
the consecration was sometimes omitted. In 
each of these cases easy verification is possible; 
but they are enough to show that the argu- 
ment from silence is only to be used with very 
great care. So used, it is of the greatest value. 
But the negative argument is never formally 
conclusive, since silence cannot prove a negative. 
It may create a probability of the very highest 
order, but that is all, and that is enough for our 
purpose. 

In the face of difficulties such as these, it is 
clear that the student has to be on his guard 
against accepting anything too readily; for a too 
easy acceptance of some ill-substantiated hypo- 
thesis may easily deflect his judgement as regards 
all that comes after, and he is far more likely to 
be over credulous than over critical. In fact, 
Langlois and Seignobos go further and say that his 
attitude of mind towards the statements contained 
in documents should be one of methodical distrust ; 


1 §. Cypr. Zpp. xlix. 1, lvii. 5; and the letter of Cornelius 
in Eus. H.£. vi. 43. Fora refutation of Dr Hatch’s argu- 
ment based on this case, see Gore, Ministry of the Church, 
ed. i., London, 1889, pp. 376, 385. 


Historical Method—I 45 


he ought, they say, “to distrust @ priori every 
statement of an author; for he cannot be sure 
that it is not mendacious or mistaken.”1 This is 
perhaps going too far: methodical distrust is 
certainly not the best path to the discovery of 
truth in the ordinary relations of life, and is 
hardly likely to be so in history, which is a mirror 
of life. On the contrary, a certain power of sym- 
pathy is essential to any real insight. But it is 
undoubtedly true that the student of history 
must remember, in dealing with the evidence 
before him, that a documentary statement is only 
the material with which he works, and not the 
finished product. 

The result of this process of sorting and sifting # 
will be found to be that the student has rejected 
some statements, that others have been resolved 
into their constituent elements, of which part only 
is retained, and that others again, which seemed to 
have been taken out of their proper environment, 
have been restored to it. ‘There will remain, 
then, a large collection of isolated facts and dis- 
jointed impressions of the most diversified char- 
acter, each of which he has critically tested and 
estimated to the best of his power. These he will 
arrange and classify as best he can, either mentally, 
or in note-books, or on slips. ‘They will form the 


2 Op, cit., p. 157. 

? Something should be said here with regard to the treat- 
ment of legendary material. But it will come more con- 
veniently in a later chapter. See below, p. 133 f. 


7~ een) ae i le 
ie a et ah C2, , 
=" 


46 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


material for the second great historical process, 
that of synthesis. 


IV 


Before, however, we pass on to consider this 
second process something must be said with regard 
to the chief pitfalls by which the path of the his- 
torical student is beset in carrying out this work of 
analysis. We may pass over what the French call 
“‘Froude’s Disease,”! or chronic inaccuracy, because 
that is enough to mar any work; but two particular 
pitfalls into which the historical student is espe- 
cially liable to stumble should be mentioned here. 

(a) It has been said that the historical student 
must arrange and classify his facts. ‘This is an 
absolute necessity ; unless he does so he will never 
be able to use them properly. But this in itself 
constitutes a difficulty ; for the more he classifies 
them the more he is in danger of forgetting that 
historical facts are not isolated but related facts ; 
not separate things but parts of a great living 
whole. The danger, then, is not only one into 
which the antiquary or the mere annalist may fall, 
but one which besets the modern scientific historian 
equally with them. But none the less it is fatal. 
It is true that the historical method isolates for 
purposes of treatment things which converge in 
experience; but it takes as its starting point 
the principle that there is no such thing as an 


1 Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., p. 125. 


4 


Historical Method—I A7 


isolated fact in history. To separate incidents 
from their causes and effects, to treat them as if 
they had any meaning in themselves, is to remove 
them from the category of actuality, ie. from 
the sphere of history. Itis for this reason that a 
single fact has no value for the historian: it tells 
him nothing. It is only when he can bring it 
into connection with some other fact that it begins 
to exist for him; and after this, each new fact 
that he can bring into relation with it (so long as 
the relation is one of life) adds solidity and mean- 
ing. On the other hand, when the facts are treated 
as separate things, and isolated from their context, 
they become inert and meaningless. The climax 
of this process is reached in such a work as the 
Descriptive Sociology of Mr Herbert Spencer, in 
which many thousands of isolated “ facts,” collected 
by various persons from a large range of books of 
all kinds, and separated entirely both from their 
natural context and from their context in the 
books from which they are taken, are classified 
and arranged in pill-boxes, so to speak, or like 
the specimens in a museum. Such a process may 
or may not have its value from other stand- 
points; from the point of view of history it is 
utterly ridiculous. 

(6) To turn now to the other pitfall, which is of 
a different kind, and which especially besets the 
path of the untrained historical student. The 
stages in the process of analysis of which we have 
spoken are all necessary; and in so far as any one 


re tod A 


48 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


of them is neglected the work will be marred. But 
in effect they are not usually carried out separately, 
The student who has learned to realise the neces- 
sity of each process separately soon learns to carry 
them out concurrently; just as in throwing a 
stone at a mark the operations of seeing the 
object, mentally locating it, directing the aim 
towards it, and discharging the stone, are per- 
formed all at once; the brain and the eye and 
the arm performing in a moment, and automa- 
tically, the processes which they at first performed 
as the outcome of distinct acts of volition, but 
have at length, as the result of practice, “ learned 
by heart.” The untrained student, of course, has 
never received this education, but he is in a worse 
plight in that he has never learned to differen- 
tiate the elements of the process at all, and is 
likely to reason as a woman throws (or used to 
throw), all at sea and anyhow. And herein lies 
the danger: the danger, namely, of mixing the 
processes in a kind of confused rule of thumb. 
It is not safe to combine the search for docu- 
ments with the criticism of documents, to confuse 
the analysis of the evidence with reasoning 
about the evidence. Nothing is more common, 
nothing can be more harmful. If this be done, 
neither process will be thorough. The mind is 
admirably adapted for reasoning, admirably 
adapted for measuring; but its operations are 
essentially unitary; and the result can only be 
muddy, confused, and delusive if we endeavour 


Historical Method—I 49 


to mix processes such as these. It is difficult or 
impossible for one who is dominated by a foregone 
conclusion as to their genuineness or the reverse 
to study the documents with an open mind; it is 
difficult or impossible for one who is the slave of 
a theory to judge honestly of the value of the 
evidence. The man who writes “history with a 
purpose,” who starts with the object of white- 
washing somebody or proving some theory of his 
own (a besetting sin of the German writer of 
dissertations), frequently does much harm. Of 
course, looking for evidence of one particular kind, 
he has no difficulty in finding it and so making out 
a case for himself; but he usually ends by darken- 
ing counsel and throwing dust in the eyes of the 
general public. Work of this kind is common 
enough, and it is unfortunately especially common 
in ecclesiastical history. But wherever it may be, 
it is bad. Certainly the great historians who have 
reversed the judgement of scholars and supplied 
the clue to what was previously dark and confused 
did not start in ways such as these. 

But in truth the danger is not only one that 
besets the theorist, or the writer of “history 
with a purpose.” It besets every student; for 
directly we begin to study the facts the mind 
recognises in them something akin to itself, and 
endeavours to co-ordinate them and to explain 
their mutual relations. It is right and natural 
that this should be so. But it is important that 
we should lead and not merely follow; that we 

D 


50 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


should reason out every question that arises and 
not allow ourselves to become merely the uncon- 
scious slaves of theories which have grown up 
whilst we slept, and which we have never really 
faced or pondered. And it is the more important 
that we should recognise that this danger is 
always present, and therefore be constantly alive 
to the necessity of keeping distinct from one 
another the mental processes which we have to 
carry out. 


The following works may be consulted on the 
subject of this chapter, in addition to that of 
Langlois and Seignobos, and that of Bernheim, 
already referred to: 


A. Tardif, Notions élémentaires de critique historique, 
Paris, 1883. 

C. de Smedt, Principes de la critique historique, 
Liége and Paris, 1883. 

J. G. Droysen, Grundriss der Historik, Berlin, 1888. 

J. von Pflugk-Harttung, Geschichtsbetrachtungen, 
Gotha, 1890. 

C. V. Langlois, Manuels de Bibliographie historique, 
Paris, 1896 f. 

P. Lacombe, Introduction a L histoire littéraire, Paris, 
1898. 


CHAPTER IV 


HISTORICAL METHOD (continued) 


Tue Work or SyNTHEsIS 


We have seen that the completed process of 
analysis leaves the student of history with a body 
of disjointed and disconnected facts: living facts 
indeed, and having no meaning except in relation 
with one another, but yet isolated and violently 
torn out of relation with one another. These 
will form the material for the second great divi- 
sion of his work, that of Synthesis. He has to 
draw together this digested and critically appraised 
material, to reintegrate it with the help of the 
insight which he has acquired in the process of 
analysing it, and to reconstruct out of the chaotic 
elements before him a narrative of events which 
shall be absolutely faithful to the evidence and 
yet not merely jejune and skeleton-like. The aim 
which he has in view is to make this narrative as 
real and as living as if the events had actually 
taken place before his eyes. 

Now it is plain that this aim is one which can 
only be fulfilled with great difficulty, and very 


imperfectly. The evidence is often very scanty ; 
61 


Oe oe 


52 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


and, at the best, the details which contemporary 
writers thought worthy of mention were often not 
at all such as we should have wished them to 
preserve for us. Moreover, the element of hard 
fact has often dwindled not a little under the test 
of careful criticism; so that when every available 
scrap of information has been duly utilised there 
will still remain many a hiatus which cannot be 
filled, many an important question the answer to 
which must still remain doubtful. What, then, 
is the work of the student of history under cir- 
cumstances such as these ?+ 


I 


To begin with, in order to describe things as if 
they had actually taken place before his eyes, he 
must endeavour to see the events which his facts 
represent. This, of course, is a purely subjective 
process ; he cannot actually reconstruct that which 
has passed away or see with his eyes that which 
has no objective reality; he can only form a 
mental picture. And even this is only possible on 
the assumption, which is “ the postulate of all the 
documentary sciences,”” that the features of the 
life of the past resembled in their essential char- 
acter the features of the life of his own day, upon 
which his own mental concepts are based. Other- 


1See Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., book iii, upon 
which the sections which follow are largely based. 
2 Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., p. 220. 


Historical Method—Il1 58 


wise, of course, he can form no trustworthy idea 
of them at all, and all his documents are reduced 
to irrational and meaningless chaos. 

Plainly, the difficulties in the way of such a 
process as this are very great, and so are the 
chances of error. In a subjective process (as this 
is) much must of necessity depend upon the per- 
sonality of the student; and, whatever it be, he 
cannot hope to see things without some natural 
bias and some error of perspective. Even when 
he is most on his guard against allowing his 
judgement to be warped by mere theorising, he is 
hardly likely to be quite successful. And if he 
is, there still remains his own personal equation. 
It is a matter of common knowledge that in an 
astronomical observatory each worker has his own 
particular kind of liability to error in his observa- 
tions, which remains more or less constant with 
him, just as some people are colour-blind, some 
are deaf, some are devoid of the sense of smell, 
and soon. So again, we know in advance that if 
a number of persons are looking at a particular 
landscape or a picture, some of them will be 
struck with one feature and some with another; 
and that these personal predilections will answer 
to the character and the capacities of the par- 
ticular observers. In like manner some persons 
are liable, both constitutionally and by education, 
to disregard some kinds of evidence, or to over- 
look certain aspects of life, or to ignore particular 
classes of facts. Accordingly, in the efforts which 


al Was es he 


54 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


he makes to reconstruct the life of the past the 
observer is morally certain to fail in some respects. 

There are, however, two safeguards: (a) In the 
first place, as we have already noticed, the his- 
torical student’s work does not stand alone, but is 
built up upon that of the historical students of 
the past, and organically united with it. This 
solidarity of historical work may be, and is,.a 
source of a certain amount of weakness in one 
direction, in that a student cannot break away 
from the atmosphere which surrounds him: he is 
tied by the limitations of his predecessors, and is 
liable to perpetuate their mistakes. But it is 
immeasurably greater as a source of strength. 
For this picturing of the past by the student has 
already been prepared for to a very great extent 
by the work of his predecessors: the main lines 
have been laid down, and many of the details 
have been filled in. And not only so: the same 
thing has been done for the events which went 
before and those which follow after; so that 
there exists already what we may compare not 
merely to an instantaneous photograph of the 
events which he has to study, but to a picture 
which shows them in their living consecutiveness. 
He must still see all this for himself, but not 
without guidance. (0) And in the second place, 
although this part of the work is subjective, it 
need not be either arbitrary or irrational. No 
doubt the student must form a mental picture, the 
details of which are coloured by his own concep- 


Historical Method—lI 55 


tions and in the long run by his own experience. 
But he will not forget that the picture itself ought 
to be based ultimately upon the facts and these 
alone, and that he must test it again and again by 
them, remembering that they are its only fixed 
points, and that it depends upon them for its 
essential character. 


II 


Having endeavoured, then, to see the facts as a 
whole as clearly as possible, the student will now 
set to work to examine them systematically, just 
as the student of zoology enters upon a system- 
atic examination of a newly- discovered organism, 
or as an astronomer sets to work to observe the 
path of a new comet that “swims within his ken.” 
Until this has been done, indeed, it cannot be 
said that he has really seen the facts as a whole at 
all. ‘That this is so is a matter of daily experi- 
ence. We think that we quite understand some 
question which is engaging popular attention, and 
find indeed that we can talk about it quite in- 
telligently, even eloquently, in a general com- 
pany; but in the presence of those who really 
know we discover that our readiness and our 
complacency alike desert us, and we “ begin with 
shame to take the lowest room.” We imagine 
that we have thoroughly mastered some subject 
that we are engaged in studying, but are surprised 
to find, when we endeavour to put down our 
impressions in writing (and still more when we 


a Be Bas 
ae Te % 
a 


56 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


endeavour to teach it to others) that our view 
was in reality very superficial, and that we had 
never really taken in the details at all. We gaze 
upon a picture, and are greatly interested in it, 
only to find when we endeavour to describe it 
afterwards that we are totally unable to answer 
many of the questions which even a sympathetic 
listener asks us. 

And this last fact suggests the only way in 
which such an examination can ever be made 
systematic and thorough. ‘The student must 
not be content with a “bird’s-eye view,” but 
must make a detailed survey. He must go over 
the whole ground and ask himself more or less 
consciously (and here as elsewhere, the more con- 
' sciously the better, because the chances of error 
and oversight are less) a series of questions touch- 
ing every part of it. Thus he will learn what he 
knows, and learn to know it thoroughly; thus 
too, which is even more important, he will learn 
his own ignorance, the consciousness of which is 
the first stepping-stone to further knowledge. 

But if such a series of questions has to be asked, 
and if they had better be asked explicitly, it is 
plain that they ought to be arranged upon some 
system. A catechism which is arranged on no 
plan is hardly likely to be exhaustive; it may 
not improbably be tautological; it is nearly 
certain to be unintelligible. In like manner, 
unless these questions are methodically stated, 
it is probable that they will not cover all parts 


Historical Method—lIlI 57 


of the ground, and certain that they will fail to 
do so in the easiest and most satisfactory way. 
What the basis of this order should be is a 
very difficult question to answer. Attempts have 
indeed been made to draw up schemes for the 
grouping of historical facts;+ but none of them 
can be pronounced wholly satisfactory, and per- 
haps all that we can say is that such a scheme 
should correspond with the subject-matter as 
closely as possible, and that there should be a 
certain amount of cross-division, so that each 
aspect may be as far as possible represented. In 
describing the pictured representation of some 
scene, for instance, we may consider (apart from 
the execution of the picture itself) the subject as 
a whole, the grouping of the parts, the general 
scheme of colour, the presentation of character, 
&c., and then proceed to the consideration of the 
details one by one. In the same way, here the 
questions may cover the whole ground chrono- 
logically, geographically, as well as from the 
points of view of economics, religion, politics, 
social life, and so on. In any case, the system, as 
we have said, must be the outcome of the mind 
which is responsible for the whole plan, and must 
be relative to that plan. We cannot form one 
single theoretical category which will comprehend 
all the facts of experience. 


1 E.g., by Lacombe, op. cit., chap. vi; and by Langlois and 
Seignobos, op. cit., book iii. chap. 2. 


58 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


Ill 


The process of systematic arrangement and 
examination of the facts will have made it more 
abundantly clear that the facts which have sur- 
vived are very unequally distributed, and that 
there are large gaps in the student’s knowledge. 
The next thing to be done, therefore, is to see 
whether it is possible to fill in any of these gaps 
by reasoning from facts which are already known. 
Plainly, there are many cases in which it is quite 
possible to do so. (a) If we look at a portrait 
which is torn or otherwise damaged, it is often 
possible to infer what should be there by what is 
actually present. If, for instance, the portrait 
is defective where the arm should be, we can 
infer its existence from the existence of the 
shoulder and the hand; if the canvas is torn 
where the eye should be, we may infer from the 
existence of the rest of the features that there 
was something of the nature of an eye there, but 
not necessarily that it was not blinded, or that 
it was of a particular colour. In like manner it is 
often possible to some extent to supply a hiatus in 
a document, or even the absence of any record of 
particular facts, by inference from the facts that 
are recorded: the very existence of these involves 
the existence of more. The process, of course, 
needs to be carried out with great care. It is 
not justifiable, for instance, to base more upon 


Historical Method—Il 59 


the indications than they of necessity involve. 
Nor is it justifiable to mix up inference with any 
other process; for instance, to make use of an 
inference from the absence of evidence in order to 
rehabilitate some theory which has already been 
set aside on adequate grounds. But within its 
own limits, historical inference is a perfectly 
legitimate and very valuable process. 

(6) More important still, as a means of supply- 
ing the lost facts of the past, and especially as 
a means of reconstructing the social order and 
recovering the institutions of former days, are the 
comparative method and the method of survivals. 
To deal with these at all adequately would re- 
quire a volume instead of a short paragraph. 
But briefly, their nature is as follows. The 
modern sciences of anthropology and ethnology 
have set before us in an entirely new light the 
widespread prevalence of social habits, customs, 
and institutions, and have enabled us to infer their 
former prevalence, even where they have now 
ceased to exist, by the vestiges which still remain. 
They set before us, for instance, the human sacri- 
fices still remaining in many parts of the world, 
the substitution in some regions of an animal 
for the man at the last moment, or the offering 
of a clay figure of a man together with something 
in the nature of a ransom, and so on, down to the 
offering of the last sheaf of a field at harvest in 
Cornwall and elsewhere, with rites which seem 
to point clearly to its being a kind of ransom for 


> Pe) 
rs 


60 Study of Ecclesiastical History m 


the man.! The inference is clear: wherever we 
can trace any of these survivals, we are on the 
track of human sacrifices: either the ancestors of 
those amongst whom they survive used human 
sacrifices, or they have adopted the practices of 
those who did. Now this process, which is itself 
“historical” in character, may obviously be used 
in connection with historical evidence more fitly 
than with anything else; and it has been used 
with the greatest success. By its means, for 
instance, the range in early days of the system 
known as “the patriarchal family” has been 
traced ; the characteristic features of early Celtic 
religion have been restored at any rate in some 
measure. By its means we are daily getting more 
light on such subjects as the early history of the 
Hebrew people, the growth of the Christian 
ministry, the development of the disciplinary 
system of the Church, the crystallisation of the 
faith into doctrine, and so on; in fact it seems 
to be held by some that the comparative method 
and the method of survivals are the most valuable 
instruments that history possesses. ‘This is doubt- 
less an exaggeration. ‘The Muse of History, if 
the expression may be allowed, does not keep all 
her eggs in one basket, and it does not follow 
that a particular method will continue to be 
specially productive in the future because it 
happens to be so to-day. It is undoubtedly 


1 See an article by 8. Baring-Gould on “Crying a Neck” 
in the Cornish Magazine, vol. i. p. 152. 


Mistorical Method—I1 61 


true, however, that no method has been more fruit- 
ful in recent years; and the names of Schrader, 
Fustel de Coulanges, Maine, and Robertson Smith, 
not to speak of those of many more still living, 
must always stand out not only as the names of 
pioneers, but of historians who have left solid and 
substantial work behind them which will not soon 
need to be done over again. 

(c) If then it is possible to recover lost facts 
and to fill up gaps by means of reasoning on the 
basis of the facts which have already been dis- 
covered, is it possible to recover them also by the 
processes of the imagination, to eke out know- 
ledge with conjecture? ‘The answer to the 
question will depend upon the precise meaning 
which is given to the word. On the one hand, 
it has been said that conjecture is “the most 
delicate and at the same time the most powerful 
and the most indispensable instrument in the 
exploration of the domain of the historical 
sciences”; on the other hand, it has been said 
that mere conjecture has no place in the work of 
historical research. We feel that a difference of 
terminology must underlie so startling a disparity ; 
and such is the case. If by conjecture is under- 
stood the process by which the student tests his 
facts, mentally suggesting first one hypothesis 
and then another for the solution of a difficult 
point on which the evidence is conflicting, until 
he finds the explanation which best satisfies the 

1 CO, de Smedt, Principes de la critique historique, p. 238. 


62 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


whole of the conditions, there can be no question 
that it is an absolutely indispensable part of the 
work of the student in history, just as it is of the 
work of every other scientific student.! It is, in 
fact, not so much a means to which he has re- 
course under particular circumstances of difficulty 
as the very thing that he is doing continually. 
His hypotheses may not always prove satisfactory : 
indeed, the more brilliant they are the more likely 
it is that some at any rate will be overthrown 
some day; but even where his conclusions are 
wrong his methods will be found suggestive.” If, 
however, by conjecture is meant mere guess-work, 
which is put forward in the place of solid fact 
and sound inference, then indeed it certainly has 
no place in historical study. Few things have 
done more harm, both in the way of raising false 
issues and of hiding the truth, than this substitu- 
tion of caprice for sound study.® 


IV 


The results have now been ascertained, as com- 
pletely as it is possible to ascertain them. One 
other thing yet remains: they must be collected and 


1 There is a striking book on this subject by M. Ernest 
Naville, La logique de Vhypothése, Paris, 1880. 

2 Amongst the most distinguished instances in our own 
day may be mentioned Professor A. Harnack and Professor 
W. M. Ramsay. 

3 Such as, in the opinion of most English scholars, is to be 
found in the work of Dr Cheyne in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, 


Historical Method—Il 63 


reduced to a systematic form, as one organic 
whole. The facts must be expressed in formulas 
or general statements; they must be interpreted 
in terms which are universal; they must be 
brought into relation with other facts. If this is 
not done, the process remains incomplete. We 
may have the material for history, but not history 
itself. ‘There is a world of difference between the 
two. It is the difference between Epiphanius and 
Eusebius, between Strype’s Memorials and Dixon’s 
History of the Reformation, between Aubrey’s 
Collections and Walton’s Lives. A little thought 
will show how frequently this last step is left 
unfinished ; how many there are who seem to be 
able to produce materials for history but not to 
write history. Nor is it only a question of the 
possession and the utilisation of a good literary 
style. Many who have this cannot write history, 
and many who have it not can yet do so; for 
from this point of view, as we have said already, 
style is nothing but the vehicle for the presenta- 
tion of the work to the world after that work is 
in effect complete. What is really needed is that 
the facts should be digested and systematised 
until they have their right perspective and their 
right proportion: a perspective and proportion 
which will depend indeed upon the point of view, 
but which, when this is once taken up, have a real 
existence. Then they must be presented in such 
a way as to form one whole with a unity of its 
own, just as the elements of a landscape combine 


64 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


to form one whole, or as the elements of a picture 
ought to combine to form one whole. 


¥ 


Such then are the chief elements of the work of 
synthesis in history. In practice these too, like 
the processes of analysis, are to a large extent per- 
formed together; doubtless with modification in 
particular cases, for genius counts for more than 
method. After all, the historian, like the poet 
and the teacher, is born, not made; and although 
method can do much for him, it can only enable 
him to do in regular and thought-out ways what 
he already does naturally and spontaneously. 
But whatever he may be, the outcome of his work 
will probably be disappointing to himself, for it 
is likely to be in effect very different from the 
ideal which he had set before himself; as is only 
natural if its essential character be borne in mind. 

There are, however, certain dangers which 
beset this part of his work which can be in a 
measure guarded against by being kept in view. 
We will only speak of two of them, as we have 
done in the case of the process of analysis. 
(a) The first of these is the undisciplined use of 
the imaginative and intuitive faculties. It is true 
that these have their place, and a most important 
one, in the synthetic processes in history ; no good 
work, indeed, can be done without them. If it 
be the case that a man of great sympathy, or 


Historical Method—II 65 


special insight into character, is more likely to 
foresee and to understand the conduct of other 
men than one who has not these gifts, it follows 
that he is likely to succeed in historical investiga- 
tions. Since history has to do with the whole of 
human life, it follows that all the gifts which 
serve to the interpretation of life must also have 
their place in historical research. But in the one 
case as in the other they must be kept carefully 
under control. So alone can they ever have their 
perfect work: apart from this they are sure to 
lead to mere unprofitable speculation or fanciful 
theorising. It would not be hard to mention 
many historical works which are vitiated by faults 
of this kind; but it may suffice to speak of Mr 
F. C. Conybeare’s edition of the Paulician manual 
called The Key of Truth, in which the editor 
has so mixed up his own somewhat extravagant 
theories of the life of the early Church with his 
account of the Paulicians and his interpretation of 
the document that the book is robbed of no small 
part of its value. 

(6) Another danger which is hardly, if at all, 
less serious is that of approaching the facts in the 
light of deliberate a priori assumptions, and in- 
terpreting them in accordance with these.2 Such 
a process is, from a historical point of view, wholly 
unjustifiable, We have, of course, every right to 


1 London, 1898. 
2 The prevalence of this practice has doubtless given rise 
to the cynical definition of history as “his story.” 
E 


a Per ae, & 


66 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


take for granted, in the interpretation of the 
history of a period, any ideas or theories which we 
have already found, by an examination of the 
evidence, to have prevailed then: to do so is 
merely to make use of a new fact which we have 
discovered. But we have no right whatever con- 
sciously to introduce ideas of our own which we 
assume to have prevailed then, or to force the 
facts into harmony with presuppositions which we 
ourselves have consciously taken up. 

It is, of course, perfectly true that reasoning on 
the basis of facts, or indeed the actual investiga- 
tion of facts, can never be a purely neutral and 
colourless process, and that “the cogency of 
evidence—nay, its whole value, and even mean- 
ing—depends absolutely on the mental convictions 
with which we approach it.”? We can only see 
what we have eyes to see. But it does not follow 
that we may wear blinkers or a veil, or that, even 
if the landscape be ruddy with fire, we shall see it 
any the better for putting on fire-coloured glasses. 
It does not follow that we may interpret the facts 
in the light of conscious prepossessions because we 
know that we cannot escape from unconscious pre- 
possessions ; even if we believe that our preposses- 
sions are true, we have thereby so far incapacitated 
ourselves from testing them fairly, or from in- 
terpreting fairly the facts which, ex hypothesi, are 
inseparably knit up with them if they are true. 
Still less does it follow that, knowing that our 


1 See Illingworth, Reason and Revelation, chaps iv and y. 
2R. C. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, London, 1897, p. x 


Mistorical Method—Il 67 


prepossessions will influence our conclusions, we 
are at liberty to hold fast to certain preposses- 
sions because we wish to be able to come to 
certain conclusions. To do this is nothing but to 
take up the position of the old lady who said, 
“Tm always open to conviction, but I'd like to 
see the man who can convince me !” 

Such a state of things is altogether lamentable. 
It may be in a measure inevitable, for instance, 
but it is none the less deplorable, that when the 
very same facts are studied by various students, 
Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Nonconformist, 
their conclusions should so frequently be, as it were, 
foregone conclusions, the outcome of a position 
which is already taken for granted. A contention 
which justifies such a state of things as this, and 
makes it quite inevitable, stands self-condemned. 

The fact is that fairness and impartiality of 
mind do not come by nature; they must be 
sought. It is no doubt true that we cannot 
divest ourselves of all our prejudices when we 
endeavour to do so, and that we may even be 
laying ourselves open to fresh prejudices ; never- 
theless, we are more likely to be impartial so. 
There is such a thing as the judicial habit of 
mind, which endeavours to set aside for the time 
being all that is not immediately necessary for 
the purpose in hand, even though it realises that 
this is a process of self-limitation; and the his- 
torical student has need to cultivate it more than 
most men. It is a process which brings its own 


68 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


reward. “Treat the Bible,” it has been said, 
“like any other book, and you will find that no 
other book is like it.” The same thing is true of 
the study of Church history or any other history. 
Let the student take off his coloured glasses, and 
he will see the colours in the landscape as he 
never saw them before. Let him no longer seek 
for a deus ex machina at every step, and he will 
see the hand of God in all history as otherwise 
he never can. And then he will be able to make 
use of his conclusions with a new confidence. 
Having done his historical work, and reached his 
results on the basis of the evidence, he will now 
be justified in taking them for granted, and making 
use of them for the purposes of life, and explaining 
their bearing upon all the other facts within his 
cognisance. But even now he will not be justified 
in using theological or philosophical arguments 
of this kind in order to rehabilitate any theory of 
the facts which has already been set aside on his- 
torical grounds. 

The tendency which is here described is to be 
found in very many modern books, the most 
remarkable from several points of view being one 
which bears the dear and great name of one who 
is no longer with us. The examination of the 
origin of the Christian ministry in the late Robert 
Campbell Moberly’s Ministerial Priesthood, and 
many of his criticisms of the work of other 
scholars, are an illustration of what is referred to. 


The method is almost wholly a priori; and useful 


Historical Method—II 69 


as the book may be in other ways, it presents a con- 
spicuous example of the way in which historical 
work is not to be done.” But there are plenty of 
books which have this same defect with none of 
the compensating virtues. Much modern apolo- 
getical literature is marred by it; and its effects 
are to be seen in a great deal that is said and 
written about the Bible. We should be prepared 
to find it,’ for instance, in a book bearing such a 
title as Lines of Defence of the Biblical Revelation. 
Wherever it is to be found, it should make us 
watchful. We need to be on our guard against 
that temper of which Frederick Denison Maurice 
has spoken in a most remarkable lecture on 
Tertullian,* that temper which assumes to be the 
champion and protector of the Gospel, instead of 
its disciple and servant. “I believe,” Maurice 
goes on, “that his [method] was far more fatal 
to that which he defended than to that which 
he opposed, . . . I often feel tempted to wish 


1In view of what I have said, I ought to express my deep 
sense of the value of Dr Moberly’s theological work. For 
instance, I would venture respectfully to endorse most of 
what Dr Sanday has said of it in his noble tribute to his 
friend’s memory in the Journal of Theological Studies for July 
1903 (vol. iv. pp. 481-499). 

2 On this point I agree with my friend Canon Henson’s criti- 
cism in Godly Union and Concord, London, 1902, pp. xxviii ff. ; 
though, as I have said elsewhere (e.g. in a paper on “ The 
Relations between the Church and Nonconformity,” read 
before the Church Congress at Northampton in 1902), I do 
not agree with his position in other ways. 

3 have not, however, examined the book in question. 

*In his Lectures on the Ecclesiastical History of the First and 
Second Centuries, London, 1854, 


70 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


that it had been used against the Gospel: then 
one would have been better able to do it greater 
justice.” 
VI 

So much for the methods of historical research. 
But in history as in other things an ounce of 
practice is worth a pound of theory. The pro- 
cesses which are here described will be better 
understood by the student when he has watched 
them in operation; they will be still better 
understood when he has endeavoured to put 
them into practice for himself. As regards 
putting them into practice, it is done to some 
small extent by every intelligent reader of history ; 
but it can only be fully tested by a man who is 
prepared to give no small part of his time to 
historical study, and who will not stint labour 
and trouble. As regards watching them in oper- 
ation, it is well worth while to take up and read 
some good historical work, with the definite 
object of scrutinising its method as closely as may 
be. It would be easy to mention others, but such 
a book as one of the following would very well 
serve this particular purpose: W. Bright, Notes 
on the Canons, Oxford, 1882 (and later editions) ; 
E. A. Freeman, History of the Cathedral Church 
of Wells, London, 1870; N. D. Fustel de Cou- 
langes, Recherches sur quelques problémes (histoire, 
Paris, 1885; J. R. Green, The Conquest of Eng- 
land, London, 1883; H. M. Gwatkin, Studies 
of Arianism, Cambridge, 1882; G. Hanotaux, 


Mistorical Method—I1 a | 


Histoire de Richelieu, Paris, 1893, etc.; J. 
Havet, Questions mérovingiennes, Paris, 1896; 
C. Hoefler, Pabst Adrian VI, Vienna, 1880; M. 
Philippson, Kardinal Granvella, Berlin, 1895; W. 
Sichel, Bolingbroke and His Times, London, 1902 ; 
or W. Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion 
of the Semites, London, 1894. In a rather more 
popular style, T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, 
8 vols, Oxford, 1880-1899, is excellent for the 
purpose. 


In addition to the books already mentioned, the 
following may be consulted on the subject of this 
chapter : 

Sir H. J. S. Maine, Ancient Lan, London, many 

editions. 

R. Flint, Historical Philosophy in France, &c., 1893. 
(The first volume of his History of the Philo- 
sophy of History, which is all that has yet 
appeared. ) 


CHAPTER V 
HOW TO STUDY ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 


Ir may perhaps be thought that we have dwelt 
upon these historical processes at inordinate 
length, and that much of what we have said only 
has reference to the specialist in history, and does 
not directly concern the general reader. But the 
fact is that, just as M. Jourdain had spoken prose 
all his life without being aware of it, and just as 
every person who thinks and talks is making use, 
either accurately or inaccurately, of logical pro- 
cesses, so too (as we have indicated already) every 
reader of history is making use in some measure, 
or ought to be, of the very methods by which the 
historian obtains his results. In one sense, rela- 
tively to historical science, he is not doing original 
work ; but in another sense, relatively to his own 
knowledge, he is. The processes are in effect the 
same. His reading is likely to be all the more 
useful if he has some idea of what those processes 
are; and this is the more necessary in the case of the 
study of ecclesiastical history, which is sometimes 
supposed to have canons and methods peculiarly 
its own. They are most characteristically seen at 
the centre and not at the cironentraney in the work 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 73 


of the professed student rather than in that of the 
general reader; and it is for this reason that we 
have dealt with them in detail there. Butin their 
essential character they are one and the same. 
Still, the fact must not be forgotten that 
although the end which the historian has in view 
is truth itself and not mere utility, it is neverthe- 
less he who exists for the sake of the reader of 
history and not vice versa. 'The less numerous 
body of necessity ministers to the more numerous, 
the professed student to the professed teachers, 
the professed teachers to the learners; and it is 
upon the class of teachers rather than upon that 
of students that the diffusion of the truth, as con- 
trasted with its discovery, in the long run depends. 
It is with these also that we are more particularly 
concerned ; and although the underlying principle 
of their work as students is the same as that of 
the work of the historian, the practical applica- 
tion is very different. It is to this practical appli- 
cation that we now turn, and especially as it 
concerns the student of ecclesiastical history. If 
much of what is here said should seem obvious, 
on consideration it will be found to be so only in 
the same sense in which many of the other lessons 
which we most need to learn may be called obvious. 


I 


There are two possible ways of setting to work 
on the study of ecclesiastical history. On the one 


74 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


hand, the student might make it his endeavour to 
get into his head a general idea of the history of 
the Christian Church from its beginning to the 
present day, and then gradually deepen and widen 
his knowledge, passing by degrees to the detailed 
investigation of particular subjects. He might, 
for instance, begin with a short text-book, and 
then go on to a longer one, and then to one of 
the general Church histories, and then to the 
histories of special periods, to the monographs on 
particular points, and soon. Or he might begin 
at exactly the opposite end. He might take, for 
example, some well-written biography of a great 
man, or some clear and straightforward history of 
an important crisis or interesting period, and use 


this as a starting point, deepening his knowledge | 


as he goes on, and stretching out from this as a 
centre on both hands, seeking light from the 
events that went before and that followed after, 
and bringing to them the reflected light from his 
own period. In a word, he might either work 
from the general to the particular, or from the 
particular to the general. 

Now which of these is the better way of setting 
to work? Perhaps our first impulse might be to 
say that the former is the better way; and certainly 
it is that which most would-be students incline to 
adopt. Nevertheless, it seems clear that this is 
not really the most natural order of procedure, 
nor is it the best. The “experimental method” 
which we have used since we were babes un- 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 75 


doubtedly began with the investigation of details ; 
and it would be a very surprising thing if, in such 
a science as history, the best method of study 
were one that proceeded from generals to par- 
ticulars. We cannot do anything without having 
a definite base; we cannot exert any power with- 
out a fulcrum; we cannot even draw a straight 
line without starting from a point. Again, even 
if it were desirable in other ways to attempt it, 
it would not really be possible to obtain a general 
view of Church history, so as to work by the 
deductive method ; for we must never forget that 
the history of the Church is not finished. And 
once more, on the practical side, such a method 
would be doomed to failure by its dulness; for 
in history as in life, we cannot get away from the 
details without losing much of our interest and 
much of our grasp of truth. From every point 
of view, then, the right method of study is that 
which begins by taking some definite subject for 
investigation.! 


II 


In other words, the student should begin by 
finding some subject for special study; let him 
take to himself a “hobby ” and treat it seriously. 
In one way it does not greatly matter what it is; 
for it can be changed later on should it prove 


1 I assume, of course, such a general knowledge as will 
enable the student to understand the main bearing of his 
facts. Most churchmen have this; it may at any rate be 
taken for granted in the case of the clergy. 


76 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


uncongenial, or it may itself lead on to some- 
thing more congenial. Let it then be something 
suggested by his previous reading, or by his tastes, 
or by his work, or by the place in which he lives, 
or the like. Or he may with advantage seek the 
advice of a friend. Anything that he really 
studies is sure to prove worthy of study; for the 
real way to find any subject in God’s world inter- 
esting is to take an interest init. It will form 
a kind of centre for his reading and his thoughts; 
for he is sure to find his thoughts turning towards 
it refreshingly. He will be impelled to read 
around it and in illustration of it. And he will 
presently learn in a very wonderful way that, 
whatever it may be, it has points of contact with 
all his studies, and that it is continually illustrat- 
ing and being illustrated by the events of his 
daily work ; just as we find that the offices of the 
Church always seem to fit in with the changes 
and chances of our lives, whatever those changes 
and chances may be. Nor will it only invest his 
whole intellectual life with a new meaning; it 
will itself be a source of unceasing interest and 
enrichment. He may not indeed attain to the 
level of Freeman’s “ideal man,” who knows 
“something about everything and everything 
about something,” but before long he will dis- 
cover that the humblest student who labours on 
at one particular piece of work may outstrip even 
the historical expert who has not made it a special 
subject of study; and that so he may be of very 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 77 


real service both to other scholars and to the 
cause of sound learning. 

And he will find that this method of study 
has another advantage. The ordinary parish 
priest is apt to say that he has no time to read. 
Such a state of things would be grievous indeed ; 
for unless there be time to pray and to study, 
all else must go wrong; and the time which is 
snatched from reading and prayer is simply 
squandered. But it is not quite true that he 
has no time to read. The parish priest has a 
good deal of time on his hands, but it is mostly 
broken up into very short periods, or else it 
comes when he is very tired; and he is always 
liable to be interrupted. Under these circum- 
stances it is very hard indeed to get much 
reading done, unless there is some definite object 
in view. No man can start upon some new work 
when he is tired out; no man can do much at it 
in odd periods of five minutes. But with such 
a “hobby” as has been described, things are 
different. It is possible to follow up a scent even 
when we are tired out; it is possible to work at a 
subject in which we are keenly interested even 
for odd periods of five minutes. Some of John 
Richard Green’s best historical work was done 
when he was curate-in-charge of an East End 
parish ; and there are those yet living there who 
can tell us that he in no way neglected the duties 


1 See the Letters of J. R. Green, edited by Sir Leslie Stephen 
(London, 1901). 


78 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


of his charge. So also, much of the fifth volume 
of Bishop Creighton’s History of the Papacy was 
written in odd periods of a few minutes, in the 
intervals between appointments, or as he travelled 
about his diocese. 


lil 


Having found such a subject for special study, 
the student will endeavour to “ make it his own.” 
He will study it in general and in detail, not only 
in its strictly ecclesiastical aspect, but as broadly 
as he can; he will try to look at it from the 
point of view of those who were concerned in it, 
and not only to see their actions but to enter into 
their motives. He will ask himself questions 
which are not to be found in the ordinary books, 
and endeavour to ascertain the answers. He will 
try to acquire a kind of personal acquaintance 
(leading on to an intimate friendship if it may so 
be!) with the great men who are connected with 
it, to read what they have written, and to under- 
stand what they are aiming at even where he does 
not approve of their action. He will also proceed 
to read round it on every side, as we have said, 
tracing the steps which led up to every great 
event and following it out in its results, seeking 
illustrations from other sources and bringing to 
bear upon his own subject all the light which he 

1 Perhaps no better illustration could be given of what is 
meant than the loving friendship for his characters which 


is manifested in the late William Bright’s Lessons from the 
Lives of Three Great Fathers, second edition, London, 1891. 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 79 


can derive from them. If he endeavours to do 
this faithfully and wisely, even though it be at 
first on a very moderate scale, he will soon find 
that his other studies have acquired an entirely 
new interest for him, and that he must needs 
read outside the special subject not only for its 
own sake but because of this new interest that 
he takes in them. 


IV 


The student who has formed such a centre of 
interest as this will need to exercise upon it all the 
powers of his mind and spirit. It is not enough 
to be brought into contact with new material; 
he must assimilate it and “make it his own.” It 
is not enough to read ; he must “ mark, learn, and 
inwardly digest.” The mere passive reception of 
impressions is not thinking ; the mind must work 
upon the material placed before it, or what has 
been done is not different in kind from what is 
done by a phonograph when it receives and re- 
cords; in one respect it is even less, for the 
phonograph does not let slip what it has once 
recorded. 

It is of course quite impossible to lay down any 
mechanical rules as to thinking: and the only 
way to think is—to think. But there are 
several things which may help the man who 
wishes really to master his subject ; in particular, 
to write, and to communicate his knowledge to 
others. By writing, as some of us have learned in 


- 


80 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


the writing of sermons, we begin to realise for the 
first time what gaps there were in our knowledge 
of a subject, how inconsecutive it was, how many 
of the stages in our argument which seemed satis- 
factory enough were in reality illogical. The 
very fact of putting things into writing makes 
them clearer and more definite than they previously 
were, and at the same time, by removing a strain 
from it, sets the memory free for further work. 
Nor is the advantage of communicating our 
knowledge less great; certainly to ourselves, per- 
haps also to others. The student who has found 
such an interest as that which we have spoken of 
ought never to be at a loss for a subject for an 
occasional lecture to his people ; and this will be 
a valuable help in his own studies. We love to 
speak of that which interests us, and our concep- 
tions undoubtedly become clearer in the effort to 
make things clear to others. The college tutor 
who once said with regard to some particular sub- 
ject of study, “I know nothing about that; I _ 
haven't even lectured on it,” was not only direct- 
ing an obvious satire against the light-hearted 
way in which college lectures are sometimes under- 
taken, but was also enunciating a very profound 
truth. 


Vv 


But if the delivery of lectures upon any subject 
has a very obvious educational value for the 
lecturer as well as for the hearers, it also lays him 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 81 


open to certain dangers, and those of a kind which 
particularly beset the parish priest at all times. 
He will be tempted to be perpetually trying “to 
point a moral and adorn a tale”; and he will be 
tempted to read in order to do so. The former 
of these is dangerous, the latter is fatal. (a) There 
is no need to be perpetually drawing conclusions. 
Even from the point of view of effect it is a mis- 
take, for it is most trying to the hearers. The 
true art of the teacher is to present the facts 
so clearly, and withal so convincingly, that the 
hearers think that the conclusions which they in- 
evitably draw from them are really their own. 
But it is bad in another way; for the habit of 
watching for cheap and obvious “morals” is like 
that of “seeking for a sign,” or being on the 
watch for occasional and exceptional interpositions 
of God’s providence. It both biases our ordinary 
judgement and incapacitates us for seeing the 
broader and deeper signs of God’s over-ruling 
guidance of this world and His true immanence in 
it. (6) The other danger, that of reading with a 
view to being able to point a moral, is far worse, 
for it is contrary to the very nature of historical 
study. We cannot read fairly with some ulterior 
purpose in our minds, and the conclusions which 
we arrive at from such premisses are not likely to 
be either fair or trustworthy. It is of course 
quite true that we must try to correlate our facts 
with other facts, to see them in the light of our 
previous knowledge, and to understand their 
F 


82 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


bearing upon the life of the Church and the 
questions of the day. But this is a process which 
should follow our study of history and not accom- 
pany it. ‘l'o mix them is to mar both; to take 
up the position of a mere partisan is to ower the 
whole level of our work.? 


VI 


From what has been said, it is clear that even 
a slight excursion in the field of ecclesiastical 
history may easily involve a very considerable 
amount of reading, extending over a very wide 
range. This is inevitable and unavoidable: from 
the very nature of his work the student of history 
has to make use of more books than almost any 
other student. It sometimes happens, in con- 
sequence, that the beginner is discouraged by 
finding that the tax upon his memory is likely to 
become greater than it can well bear. But he 
need not be discouraged. ‘The memory improves 
through proper use; and, which is more im- 
portant, the student will learn in time not to over- 
burden it. For it is easy to be under an entire 
misapprehension as to the proper function of the 
memory in historical reading. It is impossible to 
remember any but a very small part of what we 
read. It would probably be undesirable to re- 

1 Compare what is said above of a priori reasoning and 
“history with a purpose” (pp. 49, 65). 


2 A well-known historical scholar, whose memory is the 
marvel of all who know him, once asked me what pro- 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 83 


member it all even if it were possible, for the 
multiplicity of detail would only render impos- 
sible any intelligent assimilation of what was 
read. Moreover, it is not that which is grasped 
by the memory and retained, but that which sinks 
into our minds and dies, that which we seem to 
have forgotten, which really becomes part of our- 
selves, goes to the building up of character, and 
“brings forth much fruit.” Even in the special 
processes of history this is not less true than 
elsewhere; the judgement works unconsciously, 
and the mind gradually sees its way to a con- 
clusion, on the basis not so much of the single 
facts which stand out clearly and are remembered 
as of the whole impression which has been pro- 
duced by the evidence. 

But the fact is that the proper action of the 
memory is not so much a process of compression 
and preservation as one of selection. We may 
even reduce it to an epigrammatic form and say 
that the art of remembering is in reality the art 
of forgetting ; ze. of separating off the important 
facts from the unimportant, storing the former 
and rejecting the latter ; or better still, of putting 
aside what is trivial in order that what is im- 
portant may stand out in its proper size and so 
be retained. This, of course, is not all. The 
memory may undoubtedly be trained, by careful 


portion of the facts which we read are remembered. I 
guessed about two per cent.; to which he replied that he 
thought it was probably nearer one two-hundredth part! 


84 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


and kindly practice, to hold a larger number of 
single facts than it otherwise could have done; 
and a wise man will endeavour thus to train his 
memory, by whatever precise method experience 
may commend to him, taking particular care, 
however, not to overstrain it, and especially in 
times of fatigue. Nevertheless, even at the best 
the number of facts that the memory can retain 
must be limited, though it may not be calculable. 
Here, then, the judgement must come to its aid. 
The important thing is to reject merely “isolated 
facts,” i.e. those facts upon which little else 
depends, and to retain the great “key facts,” i.e. 
those which are central and vital, and from 
which, by a process of conscious or unconscious 
reasoning, we may be able to recover most of the 
rest. 


- VII 


It is not enough, however, that the memory 
should be used wisely and trained to do its work 
better: it can be relieved, to a very considerable 
extent, of what would otherwise overburden and 
so cripple it. 'The wise scholar will endeavour to 
register the results of his reading in common- 
place-books and note-books. The former, which 
will be used for entries and memoranda from his 
“occasional” reading, should be more or less 
carefully indexed ; the latter, which will deal with 
particular subjects, should be planned with all the 
foresight possible. Only one side of the page 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 85 


should be written on, the other being left clean 
for further references and notes; there should be 
a large margin, and the arrangement should be 
made as plain as it can possibly be by means of 
indentation, underlining, and the use of capitals. 
On the other hand, it is usually a mistake to copy 
out the contents of a note-book for the sake of 
clearness; for even the corrections and the in- 
evitable confusions of the original arrangement 
are sometimes a help to the memory. Carefully 
kept note-books of this description, whether of 
lectures heard or of reading done, soon become 
invaluable to the student; and in after years he 
will find them one of his most treasured posses- 
sions. Printed books can be bought again, or 
their place can be supplied by others of later 
date, but the note-books represent the reading 
of years, it may be; and nothing short of living 
those years over again could reproduce them. 
The taking of notes is a difficult art, and one 
that can only be acquired by practice. The fol- 
lowing points, however, should always be kept in 
view. (a) It is a process of selection: the note- 
book is not to be a substitute for the books, but 
a guide to them. (6) It looks to the future, not 
to the present: it is not enough to have down 
what would be intelligible at the present moment ; 
it should be as clear years hence as it is now, as 
clear when looked at from an entirely different 


1 Dr William Bright’s great series of note-books, which 
he called his Silva, were a sight to behold. 


86 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


standpoint as from that of to-day. (c) To this 
end, a note-book should have a plan of its own, 
and not be a mere skeleton outline of books read, 
a sort of commonplace-book in disguise. The 
important thing is not that it should contain a 
summary of every book read, but that it should 
represent the point of contact of the books with 
the mind of the reader, and the growing accumu- 
lation of his knowledge. And unless this be kept 
clearly in mind, the result to the reader is likely 
to be represented by Archbishop Benson’s words: 
“ His note-book is full, his mind is empty, and 
his self-content perfect.” + 

These, however, are not the only ways in which 
the student should endeavour to lighten the 
burden on his memory and to make his reading 
intelligent. He should put down in writing all 
that is capable of being reduced to the form of a 
table or conspectus. He should make rough maps 
for himself in order to represent whatever can be 
represented in this way: the results of a war 
of conquest, the nations supporting a pope and 
antipope respectively, the dominions of a king, 
the houses of a monastic order, the extent of an 
ecclesiastical province, or the like. He should 
insert cross-references in his books, taking care, 
however, only to do so when there is real reason 
for it. He may with advantage make a sort of 
manuscript index or list of contents at the end of 


1 Vigilemus et Oremus, editio altera, London and Lincoln, 
1881, 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 87 


the books that he reads.1 How far it is wise 
to underline passages in books, or to mark the 
margins, is perhaps another question; for such 
marking, made when the book was read from one 
point of view, is rarely useful, and indeed is apt 
to be a hindrance rather than a help when it is 
read again from another point of view. The 
practice is recommended by Archbishop Benson ;? 
but those who haveiseen the delicate pencil-marking 
in the margin of any of his books® will realise 
that what he speaks of is something very different 
from the thick black underlining in ink, making 
every page hideous, which one is sometimes unfor- 
tunate enough to find disfiguring the early parts 
of books which one has bought second-hand. It 
rarely goes further than the first chapter or two, 
and then ceases abruptly, the former owner having 
apparently given up the whole thing in disgust, 
as well he might ! 


Vill 


The more faithfully and impartially he sets 
about his work, the more likely is the student to 
experience a certain feeling of dissatisfaction with 
the results. It is not simply that he will be pain- 
fully conscious of the imperfections of his own 
work : every true worker will find that this is so, 

1 Many of the books in Bishop Jacobson’s library at Chester, 
which he left for the clergy of the diocese, have such an 
index in the Bishop’s writing. 

2 Vigilemus et Oremus, p. 20. 

3 Or those of Bishop Westcott. 


88 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


and it almost goes without saying. But the con- 
clusions to which his study of the evidence will 
lead him are likely to disappoint him. It is almost 
a commonplace to say that modern historical study 
whitewashes those whose reputations have been 
bad and blackens those who have been more 
fortunate. The student will find that this is so: 
that as he passes from the judgement of men, who 
always distribute praise and blame alike with a 
lavish hand, to the contemplation of the facts, 
the proportions dwindle and the perspective 
changes. Many a hero falls from his pedestal; 
many a villain turns out to be not quite so black 
as he was painted. ‘The geese are not quite such 
geese as they seemed, nor the swans such swans. 
Even the party|to which we belong, or the Church - 
of which we are members, would seem not always 
to have been above blame. Bishop Creighton has 
said of the time of the English Reformation that 
“it is difficult in such a time [of revolt and 
upheaval] to find heroes, to discover a man whom 
we can unreservedly admire.”1 The same thing 
might be said of other periods too. 

As the sober “light of common day” spreads 
over the landscape, the student’s first feeling is 
likely to be one of disappointment: the world of 
realities is not so beautiful as the world of dreams. 
As Bishop Stubbs has said, “He who devotes 
himself to the study of history may be a wiser, 


1 Archbishop Laud Commemoration Book, London, 1895, 
p. 14. 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 89 


he will be a sadder man.” But although he may 
be a sadder, he should also be a gladder man; 
he will find that another great teacher, Joseph 
Barber Lightfoot, was right when he said that 
history is the best cordial for drooping spirits. 
For although the heroes of the past have failed 
him, “God is it that transcends.” Although the 
heroes of his imagination may have been more 
highly adorned than their historic prototypes, 
the latter, with all their faults, are more loveable, 
for they are nearer to ourselves: they are even 
nobler with the stains of their conflicts upon them 
than in their unreal and lifeless perfection. Al- 
though the ancient civilisations turn out on ex- 
amination to have been sordid and unclean, and 
the ages of faith to have been brutal and un- 
believing, it only means that the “ increasing 
purpose” runs through all more plainly than 
ever; and the golden age, which we thought 
to be in the distant past, turns out to be before 
us and not behind. 


Ix 


There remains one other subject which must be 
spoken of in this chapter. Many who enter upon 
the study of ecclesiastical history with avidity 
make no real headway because after a time they 
get discouraged. They seem to make quick pro- 
gress at first, and everything looks simple enough; 
but after a time they discover that the progress 


90 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


has slackened, and that the same amount of 
labour expended does not produce anything like 
the same apparent result. They therefore begin 
looking elsewhere, in the hope of finding some 
employment in which they can hope for quicker 
and more abundant returns. It is not surprising, 
however, that the results should seem to be less 
as the work proceeds ; all that it means is that 
the “law of diminishing returns” applies to 
ecclesiastical history as it applies to everything 
else. We do not expect to find that a double 
expenditure of fuel will double the speed of our 
warships, or that a double charge of powder will 
send a projectile twice as far as the single charge; 
nor can we reasonably expect to find it otherwise 
with regard to the study of ecclesiastical history. 
At any rate, the law does so apply, both in this 
and in every other scientific study. He who 
would do any real work must be prepared to re- 
cognise the fact, to face much drudgery for which 
he will never have anything to show, and to apply 
himself all the more diligently because the results 
seem few and far between. He will have his 
reward ; not perhaps that of which he dreamed at 
first, but one far better worth the winning. 


On the subject of this chapter the reader may 
refer to: 


E. W. Benson, Vigilemus et Oremus, London (James 
Parker) and Lincoln (Williamson), second 


7 


How to Study Ecclesiastical History 91 


edition, 1881. (A little manual of Hints on 
Reading and Prayers, written for the students 
of the Scholae Cancellarii at Lincoln ; it is not 
nearly so well known as it ought to be.) 

E. A. Freeman, The Methods of Historical Study, 
London, 1886. 

W. Stubbs, Lectures on the Study of Medieval and 
Modern History, third edition, Oxford, 1900 
(especially lectures ii-v and ix). 


i 


CHAPTER VI 
THE CHOICE OF BOOKS 


Havine considered the general object which the 
student of ecclesiastical history should have in 
view, and the methods of working which he will 
make use of, we pass on in the present chapter to 
the choice of books in general. 


I 


To begin with, let it be borne in mind that 
there is no question so hard to answer, or so 
unprofitable (ze. as it stands) as that which is 
more frequently asked, perhaps, than any other: 
Is this a good book to read? or, What is the best 
book on so-and so? It is difficult to reply cate- 
gorically to such a question, because the answer 
depends entirely upon the questioner. The book 
may be never so good to read, but it may still be 
the case that he would be better employed in read- 
ing anything else. It may be the most learned or 
most thorough book upon the subject, and yet of 
such a nature as only to perplex and mystify him, 
whereas a much slighter book might be more 
likely to supply what he needs. In other words, 


The Choice of Books 93 


the value of a book is relative to its reader: there 
are few books which everybody could read with ad- 
vantage, few perhaps which could benefit no reader. 
It is told in the life of George Crabbe the poet 
that he used to read every book that came into 
his hands, saying that there was no book so worth- 
less that it had nothing to teach. This is pro- 
bably quite true, though it does not by any means 
follow that every book would compensate us for 
the time and trouble that would be expended in 
reading it: still less that the time could not be 
better spent. But however this may be, the 
fact remains that the abstract value of a book 
is not a sufficient criterion by which to gauge 
its value relatively to a particular reader. If a 
book is valuable to him, it will be so as part of 
his general education, or as fitting him for some 
special task, or as a stage in the pursuit of know- 
ledge, or as a means of refreshment and relaxation. 
And unless it serves some such purpose as this 
(unless, that is, it has some definite and salutary 
relation to his own personality) the reading of 
it will be merely desultory reading, which may 
be good indeed within limits, but needs to be 
carefully kept within bounds. 


II 


Secondly, let it be remembered that the object 
of reading books is not to find something with 
which we can agree. “There are not a few 


94 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


persons who seem to read books with the object 
of finding in print ideas with which they are 
already familiar, and who always call things 
obscure if they are new to them and not very 
easy of assimilation.” In like manner they 
regard a book as a good book if it can pronounce 
their own particular Shibboleth and a bad one if 
it cannot: and a considerable number of the 
reviewers of books for some of the so-called reli- 
gious newspapers seem to share the same opinion. 
But this is not the case. A book is none the 
better because it happens to say just what we 
thought already, and to add a few additional 
facts which serve to bolster up our opinion; nor 
is it any the worse because it gives us something 
to think about, and shows us that our view is not 
the only one which reasonable people have held. 
In fact, the book with which we most profoundly 
disagree is often that which is likely to teach us 
most and to stimulate us most.? From the point 
of view with which we are at present especially 
concerned, that is the best book which is most 
honest and which is based upon the most thorough 
knowledge of the facts. That the author does 
not write from our own standpoint does not 
matter in the least. That he should be pre- 


1 Saturday Review, August 1, 1903, p. 143d. 

2 On one occasion when Bishop Westcott was about to 
give an address on some educational subject I found him 
reading an essay on education by Emerson. ‘I do not 
agree,” he explained, “ with his views on the subject, but 
that is why I find him so stimulating.” 


The Choice of Books 95 


judiced does not greatly matter, for we can soon 
see and can easily allow for his bias; and if he 
gives abundant references (as it is to be hoped 
that he will?) he will have given us the means of 
checking some at any rate of his vagaries. On 
the other hand, mere compilations, however 
orthodox and however cordially we agree with 
them, are not likely to be of much use ; “ popular” 
works are of very little value unless they are 
the work of really good scholars; and mere ex 
parte statements are to be avoided carefully, as 
giving rise to far more misunderstandings than 
they can hope to allay. 


It 


The best books then are those which are most 
honestly written and which are based upon the 
largest and most discriminating study of the 
original authorities. But the student needs some 
further criterion than this in the selection of 
books; and it is supplied by the plan of study 
upon which he is supposed to be entering or to 
have already entered.? He is studying some par- 
ticular period, or subject, or the like, and making 
this a centre from which to read in all directions, 
always however in some sort of relation with his 

1 The plan which is fashionable just now of giving no 
references is surely much to be deplored. Nor is the lack 
of them really compensated for when, as in the Cambridge 


Modern History, there is an abundant bibliography. 
2 See above, p. 75 f. 


96 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


main subject of study for the time being. He 
will use books or monographs on particular 
subjects, or general Church histories, or text- 
books, or whatever it may be, in accordance 
with the exigencies of his plan. 

(a) Of these classes of books, the first-named is 
undoubtedly the most important. Books of this 
kind are as a rule more interesting, on account of 
the larger scope which is given to the personal 
element; they are more thorough, because the 
author is not so much tied by the necessity of 
uniformity of scale; and the difference of treat- 
ment which we experience as we pass from one 
subject to another is in reality a help to the 
student rather than a hindrance. Books on 
particular subjects then are undoubtedly the 
mainstay of historical literature. . 

(b) Nevertheless, the general history has a place 
which is all its own. The student who has begun 
to find that his grasp is closing upon his subject 
will feel the need of them at every turn, and will 
at times have to spend no small part of his 
energies upon them. He may not read any of 
them through from end to end,! but they will 
never be out of reach, and first one, then 
another, will have to be consulted. Gibbon’s 
great masterpiece, the Decline and Fall of 
the Roman Empire, stands of course in the 


1 A well-known ecclesiastical historian told me once that 
he had never read through any general ecclesiastical history. 
Probably many others could say the same. 


The Choice of Books 97 


front rank, though it is not a Church history 
at all. In spite of its scepticism and its bias 
against the Christian Faith, it is one of the 
strongest evidential works in existence; and 
in spite of the hundred years and more that 
have passed away since its completion it still 
remains the greatest historical work that any 
English writer has produced. Of other general 
ecclesiastical histories, some are to be preferred 
for one purpose and some for another; and all, of 
course, need to be brought up to date on parti- 
cular points by means of the books on special 
subjects. Baronius and his continuators must 
always be of the greatest value for the documents 
which they give. Mosheim is fair-minded and 
accurate, and in the latest English edition is 
useful as one of the best summaries that we have. 
Neander is excellent on the philosophical side; 
and Gieseler, prejudiced as he is, is nevertheless 
of great value for the very full quotations from 
authorities which are given in the notes. Milman 
gives a spirited account of the development of 
Latin Christendom, which, however, is not alto- 
gether deserving of its high reputation; and 
Schaff has produced a work which, if no more than 
a compilation, is at all events full, learned, and 
fair-minded. The most valuable work for pur- 
poses of reference is undoubtedly that of the late 
Wilhelm Moeller, which is written with scientific 

1 The best edition is that by J. B. Bury, 7 vols, London, 


1896-1900. 
G 


98 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


accuracy and method, and gives the results of the 
latest research, but in such a condensed form, and 
with such barbarity of style, that it is hardly 
fitted for consecutive reading. 

(c) We pass on to text-books, whose name is 
legion. These also are of great value if they are 
rightly used. 'They are not, however, with a few 
exceptions,} fit to be used as introductions to the 
subjects with which they deal; and much of the 
distaste for Church history amongst certain classes 
of students is probably to be traced to the fact 
that they have endeavoured to learn it from them. 
For this purpose few of them are fitted; and a 
man needs a certain amount of previous knowledge 
to be able to read a text-book withadvantage. As 
a rule they are so full of facts, jammed together 
until all semblance of life has been obliterated, 
that it is hard to derive any knowledge of 
history from a study of them alone. Where they 
are valuable, however, is for purposes of revision. 
The man who already knows something of the 
subject will be able to recall the facts to his mind 
by means of them, and the mind will proceed to 
restore something of life to them, compressed and 
lifeless as they are. 


(d) One other class of books must still be spoken 


1 The most notable of these is the little Kirchengeschichte 
im Grundriss of Dr Rudolf Sohm, translated into English 
under the title Outlines of Church History (London, 1895), with 
a preface by Professor Gwatkin. It is written from a de- 
finitely Lutheran standpoint ; but allowance is easily made 
for this. 


The Choice of Books 99 


of, viz. those which have a definitely apologetic 
character. Now the proper function of historical 
writings of an apologetic character is to deal in 
detail with points which have been made the 
subject of controversy, isolating them indeed for 
the purposes of separate treatment, but dealing 
faithfully with everything, extenuating nothing 
nor setting down aught in malice. These have, 
of course, a real place in the studies of every 
teacher, and he may not neglect them. With 
“gutter apologetics,” which appeal to the pas- 
sions and not to the reason, and view the facts 
through the medium of a false lens which dis- 
torts and colours that which it magnifies, the 
less he has to do the better. But even apart 
from things such as this, the student will find it 
wise to endeavour under no circumstances to 
mix up the reading of apologetic literature with 
the systematic study of Church history. When 
we have as far as possible covered our ground 
this will help us to utilise what we have read, 
and to direct it towards the resolution of doubts 
and difficulties, and to teach rightly those who 
are committed to our instruction. But, as it 
has been said already, we cannot carry on the 
two processes of studying and interpreting con- 
currently without loss to both. When we do so 
we fall into the same kind of error as they do 
who read only with a view to the preparation of 
sermons, and, if possible, in an even more per- 
nicious form. 


100 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


iv 

It is hardly necessary to say that the student 
should be careful to make use of all the subsidiary 
aids that come in his way; no amount of con- 
secutive reading of books can compensate for 
the neglect of facilities of this kind. (a) The 
first of these, which indeed is so important that 
it can hardly be called subsidiary, is an atlas. 
“Never read without an Atlas.”4 Such was 
Archbishop Benson’s advice; and the student 
will do all the better if he has two, a good 
modern one and a good historical one. As re- 
gards the latter, the best of all is undoubtedly 
the new Historical Atlas of Modern Europe, 
edited by R. L. Poole (Oxford, 1902). Next to it 
may be placed Spruner and Menke’s Hand-Atlas 
fiir die Geschichte des Mittelalters und der neueren 
Zeiten (Gotha, 1880)?; whilst on a rather smaller 
scale F. Schrader’s Atlas de géographie historique 
(Paris, 1896), and G. Droysen’s Historische Hand- 
Atlas (Bielefeld, 1886) are excellent. Other 
books which will be found useful are E. A. Free- 
man’s Historical Geography of Europe (2 vols, 
London, 1882; new edition by Prof. J. B. 
Bury in preparation), and E. McClure’s His- 
torical Church Atlas (London, 1897). (6) The 
student will also make use of all the help supplied 
by calendars, chronological and genealogical tables 


1 Vigilemus et Oremus, p. 14. 
2 Single maps from this atlas may be purchased, which is 
often a great convenience. 


The Choice of Books 101 


and lists, &c. Mention may be made of H. F. 
Clinton’s Fastt Hellenici (3 vols, Oxford, 1827-34) 
and Fasti Romani (2 vols, Oxford, 1845-50), both 
of which need revision ; and especially of De Mas 
Latrie’s Trésor de chronologie, @histoire et de 
géographie pour Pétude des documents du moyen age 
(Paris, 1889), an enormous folio volume which 
contains nearly all that one can wish for in the 
way of tables and lists, almost exhaustive so far as 
France is concerned, and fuller than any other 
single collection for the whole of Europe. This, 
however, is now very expensive, and for most 
students unattainable. The following works will 
to some extent supply the same material, though 
they are of varying degrees of accuracy: N. H. 
Nicolas, Chronology of History (London, 1838); 
J. Blair and J. W. Rosse, Chronological Tables, 
3 vols, London, 1891-2; H. B. George, Genealo- 
gical Tables (Oxford, 1874); and O. Lorenz, 
Genealogische Handbuch der europdischen Staaten- 
geschichte (Berlin, 1895). To these may be added 
the following, which contain the lists of succession 
of bishops, &c.: P. B. Gams, Series episcoporum 
ecclesiae Catholicae, and supplement (Ratisbon, 
1873, 1886) ; W. Stubbs, Registrum Sacrum Angli- 
canum (Oxford, 1858, new edition 1897); J. Le 
Neve, Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, new edition by 
T. Duffus Hardy (3 vols, Oxford, 1854); and 
H. Cotton, Fasti Ecclesiae Hibernicae (6 vols, 
Dublin, 1848-78). ‘The great Glossarium mediae 
et infimae Latinitatis of C. du Fresne du Cange is 


102 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


an unfailing source of information, not only as 
to the meaning of medieval Latin words and 
phrases, but as to the customs and life of the 
middle ages: the most convenient editions are 
those of G. A. L. Henschel (7 vols, Paris, 1840- 
50) and L. Favre (10 vols, Niort, 1883-7). 
For the modern equivalents of Latin place-names 
the student may consult J. G. T. Graesse, Orbis 
Latinus (Dresden, 1861), and C. T. Martin, The 
Record Interpreter (London, 1882), the latter of 
which contains a large amount of information 
which is of great service to the reader of manu- 
scripts. 
¥ 


It is of course an excellent thing that the 
student should know his way thoroughly well 
through any good book, so as to be able to use’ 
it as a thread, so to speak, by which to join 
together all his other reading. But the “one- 
book” man, who swears by a single author and 
regards his work as having the same relation to 
knowledge at large which the Creed has to the 
Faith, is a deplorable creature. This is of course 
a very extreme case; such a man as this is seldom 
met with; but the temper is a very common one. 
If there is to be any progress at all, this sort of 
one-sidedness must be avoided at all costs. One 
of the best ways in which to avoid it is to adopt a 


1 The Lexicon Manuale of W. H. Maigne d’Arnis, on the 
basis of Du Cange, is only useful as a glossary, in the strict 
sense of the word. 


The Choice of Books 103 


practice which Archbishop Benson used to re- 
commend: “ Always be reading at least two books 
on the period [upon which you are engaged], and 
the life of one or more great men who lived in 
it.”"1 The advantages to be derived from the 
practice are obvious: the two or more books will 
help to correct one another’s one-sidedness; the 
repeated study of the same subject-matter in 
different forms will assist the memory; and (what 
is even more important) it will give to what is 
studied that light and shade, that sense of depth 
and solidity, which distinguishes a stereoscopic 
picture from an ordinary photograph. The same 
purpose will be served by the practice of read- 
ing up particular subjects in one of the great 
dictionaries or other large works; by cultivating 
the habit of “dipping into” substantial books 
“dealing with the subject which is being explored, 
and even by glancing through books for a few 
minutes at a time. An occasional half hour 
spent in this way in a library, browsing upon the 
treasures which it contains, or even upon the 
books in a good second-hand book-shop, is a very 
profitable thing. Perhaps all this may sound 
superficial, but even if it meant no more than 
getting familiar with the appearance of the books 
it would be well worth doing; for he who does not 
know the outside of great books will probably 
not know the inside either. As a matter of fact 
it means a great deal more; for the student very 
1 Vigilemus et Oremus, p. 14. 


104 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


soon learns to know something of the inside 
of the books which are glanced at in this way. 
There is of course a certain knack about it, but 
it is easily learned ; and the student who has once 
acquired the habit of scrutinising prefaces and 
tables of contents, and the general arrangement 
of the text and the notes upon the page, will 
soon find it easy to get what he wants out of a 
book without unnecessary waste of time. 


VI 


It follows from what has been said that the 
student should do much of his reading in books 
that are not new. This is indeed inevitable, for 
if he is to read ecclesiastical history to any 
advantage he will certainly find it hard to get 
all that he wants in new, or even in modern’ 
books. ‘The whole range of historical literature 
cannot be brought up to date every few years, 
and there are many subjects which have not been 
adequately treated at all within recent times. 
Nor is it to be wished that they should be fully 
treated de novo; for if a piece of work has once 
been well done there is no reason why it should be 
done over again. But the reading of the litera- 
ture of a former day is a desirable thing in itself. 
As it is a good thing to read books written from 
a point of view other than our own, so is it good, 
and to a much larger degree, to read that which 
represents the standpoint of a former age. 


The Choice of Books 105 


There are, of course, some matters in which 
this is not possible. If we want the latest dis- 
coveries and the results of the most recent re- 
search, it is plain that we must seek them in 
modern works ;! and for this reason it would be 
simply ridiculous to advise a student of one of 
the natural sciences to read old books. Again, 
and for the same reason, it is rarely possible to 
make use of a text-book of more than, say, 
twenty years old. Once more, there are parti- 
cular modern books which ought to be read not 
less but more than they are. Nearly every age 
has its prophetic teachers, whose function it is to 
discover and proclaim some fresh revelation of 
the age-long Faith under the new conditions and 
the new needs of to-day. It is always a good 
thing for us if we can recognise and study them; 
and the real difficulty is that these prophets of 
to-day, who will be the teachers of to-morrow, 
are not always easily recognised by their con- 
temporaries: sometimes, alas, they are not re- 
cognised until it is time for the sons to build 
the sepulchres of those whom their fathers have 
slain. For nothing is easier than to mistake the 
true character of the age in which we live, to be 
bold when we should tremble, and to be afraid 


' Such new finds are chronicled in the Journal of Theolo- 
logical Studies, the English Historical Review, &c. Convenient 
summary accounts of the chief work that has been done in 
Church history, &c., during the last twenty-five years will be 
found in the articles on the respective subjects in the new 
volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannice (tenth edition). 


106 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


where no fear is. We may easily fail to see what 
is really critical and vital, and thus spend our 
strength in avoiding the dangers of the past 
rather than the dangers of the present, in con- 
futing Sabellius who is dead and buried rather 
than Arius who is very much alive. If, then, we 
can learn to follow our prophets, who set forth for 
us things as they are, we shall do well. But apart 
from things such as these, the older standard 
books are greatly to be preferred, and the reader 
of them has many advantages. For one thing, he 
may be sure that these books have at any rate some 
permanent value, or they would not have retained 
their position so long as they have. What is much 
more important, they represent another standpoint 
than our own, and thus help to deliver us from 
the limitations of present-day thinking. For 
the chief recommendation of the “up-to-date” 
book, in the eyes of many, is that it represents 
the most approved theological standpoint of our 
own day and the latest fashion in Churchmanship. 
As a matter of fact this is just what condemns 
it, so far as the work of the student is con- 
cerned. No doubt these things have their value; 
they are probably just what the students of the 
last generation most needed. But they are not 
what we need. They are with us always; they 
influence us whether we will or not; they are, so 
to speak, in the very air we breathe. For us, in 
fact, they are no longer a thing to be sought but 
a thing to be avoided, no longer an aspiration 


The Choice of Books 107 


but a limitation. It is almost time to unlearn 
them ; it is quite time to reach forward to some- 
thing that shall be wider, ampler, more Catholic. 
The student, at any rate, has little or nothing to 
learn from the book that says the obvious thing, 
just “ whot a owt to a’ said”; the best thing that 
he can do under such circumstances is to “‘ coom 
awaiiy”; to seek the books of to-morrow, to which 
reference has been made above, or the books of 
yesterday. ‘These latter have much to teach him, 
for they measure things by altogether different 
standards. No doubt they too have their limit- 
ations ; they too were dominated by the spirit of 
their age; they too have their elements which 
were merely transitory and evanescent. . But these 
elements will not enslave the student; rather he 
will take note of them as characteristic of par- 
ticular periods. By this means he will be the 
richer in proportion as he can learn to enter into 
something of the limitations of former days, and 
rise above them by entering into them. 


Vil 


But the student of ecclesiastical history cannot 
be said to have done anything at all until he has 
begun to read the original authorities, 7.e. until 
he has passed from what modern writers say about 
events to what is said of them by the persons who 
actually took part in them or lived whilst they 
were going on. He may not indeed be able to 


108 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


study them in detail, still less to work through 
them systematically at first hand; this is the 
work of the trained historian. But even the 
reading of a single contemporary narrative will 
bring him into closer touch with what was going 
on than anything else can; and the more he can 
read, the more he will be able to enter into the 
spirit of it all. To pass in this way from the 
life of to-day into the very midst of the life of 
other days is like living in space of three dimen- 
sions instead of upon a superficies of two; and he 
who has realised the difference will never be able 
to look at things from quite so narrow or limited 
a point of view in the future. 

Here, of course, there comes in the difficulty of 
language, at any rate for every period before the 
sixteenth century, and for all but English history 
after that period. But the difficulty is not so 
overwhelming, perhaps, as is commonly supposed. 
It is of course true that for any real study of 
history a certain knowledge of classical and modern 
languages is indispensable. A very little, how- 
ever, can be made to go a long way for most 
purposes: plenty of pluck, plenty of perseverance, 
plenty of dictionary, and no more grammar than 
need be, will make many things possible which at 
first sight seem impossible. There is of course 
a point, however, where everything depends upon 
precise and accurate scholarship; and there the 
ill-equipped student must needs depend upon the 
exact scholar. For the purposes of which we are 


The Choice of Books 109 


at present speaking, however, even this much is 
not essential. He who cannot read other languages 
will do well to get what he can (and it is no little) 
in translations; and even a bad translation is 
better than nothing, for this purpose. He will, 
of course, lose something both in accuracy and in 
beauty, and the reading of translations is in general 
tedious; but at least he will secure what is really 
all-important, the power to transport himself into 
the very atmosphere of the period which he is 
studying. It is true, of course, that the use of 
translations is offensive to the pedant; but the 
student who is handicapped by his lack of lin- 
guistic ability will not allow this fact to rob him 
of what is a most useful help.! And indeed it is 
not only he who finds them useful. If the truth 
were known, it would probably appear that at 
least nine out of every ten students of history 
make use of translations wherever they can, of 
course verifying their quotations, in the explora- 
tion of the immense masses of material with which 
they have to deal. The only difference is that 
some use their translations openly and gratefully, 
while others do not. 

1 Mention may be made here of some collections of trans- 
lated documents or passages which the student will find 
useful: H. M. Gwatkin, Selections from Early Church Writers, 
second edition, London, 1899 (with the originals); E. F. 
Henderson, Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages, 
London, 1896; H. Gee and W. J. Hardy, Documents Illustrative 
of English Church History, London, 1896; G. C. Lee, Leading 
Documents of English History, London, 1900; and the useful 


series of Translations and Reprints published by the Columbia 
University. 


110 Study of Ecclesiastical History de 


If he is wise, then, the student will endeavour 
as quickly as possible to get into touch with the 
sources for the history of the period which he is 
studying. Of course, the more he can read the 
better; but in case he can only read a little, he 
will do well to choose such things as will give him 
the atmosphere of the period rather than those 
which the historian would have to use for the 
discovery of exact fact: chronicles will be more 
suitable than official documents, familiar letters 
than state papers, and so on. Most important 
of all, of course, are certain great historical works : 
the man who really knows his Tacitus or Euse- 
bius or Beda, or on a lower plane Gregory of 
Tours or Anna Comnena, Ordericus Vitalis or 
Matthew Paris, has by that fact alone acquired 
a sound grasp of the history of the period repre- 
sented by his author. Next to histories (for this 
purpose) we may place letters. They are often 
disappointingly empty and rhetorical, partly 
owing to the fact that a letter was a much more 
important literary undertaking once than it is 
nowadays. Nevertheless, they are of the greatest 
possible value ; and the man who will enter upon 
the study of the letters of Cyprian, or Ambrose, or 
Augustine, or Jerome, or Basil, or Leo, or Gregory 
the Great, or Boniface of Mainz, or Gerbert of 
Reims (Pope Sylvester II), or Anselm, or ‘Thomas 
Becket and his correspondents, or Grostete, or 
above all Erasmus, not to mention many others, 
will find that he has discovered a rich storehouse. 


The Choice of Books 111 


Next after these, if not indeed before them, may 
be placed a class of documents which usually have 
an even greater historical importance, viz. “oc- 
casional” writings; such as the Apology of 
Aristides, or the Martyrdom of Perpetua and 
her Companions, or Athanasius de Synodis, or the 
Appeal of Flavian to Leo; or the Rule of Bene- 
dict, or the Caroline Books, or the Mirror of 
Perfection, or the Consilium de emendanda ecclesia, 
or the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus. 

All these of course are no more than specimens ; 
and the list might be indefinitely extended. 
These, however, may serve. And the reader who 
endeavours, in reading the history of any period, 
to get into touch as quickly as possible with 
its actual documents will find that his knowledge 
is of an altogether different kind from anything 
that he could claim to have before. 


The following are the full titles of the works 
mentioned in Section III of this chapter: 


C. Baronius, Annales Ecclesiastici (to 1198). 
Continued by O. Raynaldus to 1565; and 
by G. Laderchi to 1572. The most con- 
venient edition is that in 19 vols, Lucea, 
1738-46.! 

J. L. von Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical 
History, translated by J. Murdock and 





1 There is a modern continuation to 1585 by Aug. Theiner, 
3 vols, Rome, 1856. 





112 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


H. Soames, and edited by W. Stubbs, 
3 vols, London, 1863. 

J. A. W. Neander, History of the Christian Re- 
ligion and Church, 10 vols, London, 1850-8. 

J. C. L. Gieseler, Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte, 
6 vols, Bonn, 1828-57. (English transla- 
tion of first 4 vols, Edinburgh, 1850 f.) 

H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity, 
6 vols, London, 1854-5 (many later 
editions). 

P. Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 12 
vols, Edinburgh, 1883-93. 

W. Moeller, Kirchengeschichte (English trans- 
lation to 1648, 3 vols, London, 1892-1900). 


Most of the works mentioned in Section VI of this 
chapter may be found in Migne’s Patrologia, though 
there are, of course, many other editions. Those - 
which are not to be found there, or which are more 
conveniently studied elsewhere, are given in the 
following list : 


Tacitus, Annals and History (any modern 
edition). 

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, ed. W. Bright, 
Oxford, 1881. 

Beda, Ecclesiastical History, ed. C. Plummer, 
2 vols, Oxford, 1896. 

Anna Comnena, Alezias, ed. Schopen and 
Reifferscheid; 2 vols, Bonn, 1839-78. 
Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. H. R. 
Luard, Rolls Series, 7 vols, 1872-83. (An 
old edition in folio by W. Wats, London, 

1640, may often be picked up cheaply.) 


The Choice of Books 113 


Boniface, Epistolae, ed. E. L. Diimmler, Monwmenta 
Historiae Germaniae, Berlin, 1897. (Or P. 
Jaffé, Monumenta Moguntina, Berlin, 1865.) 

Gerbert, Epistolae, ed. J. Havet, Paris, 1889. 

Thomas Becket, Materials for the History of, 
ed. J. C. Robertson, Rolls Series, 7 vols, 
1875-85. (The letters are in vols v—vii.) 

Grostete, Epistolae, ed. H. R. Luard, Rolls 
Series, 1861. 

Erasmus, Epistolae, in the edition of his works 
by J. Le Clere, 10 vols, Leyden, 1703-6. 
(Old folio editions of the letters are often 
to be picked up cheaply.) 

The Apology of Aristides, ed. J. Armitage 
Robinson and J. Rendel Harris, second 
edition, Cambridge, 1893. (Teats and 
Studies, vol. i, No. 2.) | 

The Martyrdom of Perpetua, ed. J. Armitage 
Robinson, Cambridge, 1891. (Jo. ii. 1.) 

Appellatio Flaviani, ed. T. A. Lacey, London, 
1903. (Church Historical Society’s Publica- 
tions, No. lxx.) 

Speculum Perfectionis Beati Francisci, ed. P. 
Sabatier, Paris, 1899. 

Fasciculus rerum expetendarum, &c., ed. E. Brown, 
2 vols, London, 1690. (Contains the 
Consilium de emendanda Ecclesia, and many 
other documents of great value.) 

Constitutiones Societatis Jesu, Avignon, 1827. 
(Many other editions. ) 


There are translations of Tacitus, Eusebius, 


Beda, and Ordericus Vitalis in Bohn’s Libraries ; but 


H 


cee 
114 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


the best translation of Tacitus is that of A. J. Church 
and W. J. Brodribb (London, the History, 1864, the 
Annals, 1877), and of Eusebius that with notes by 
A. C. McGiffert in the Nicene and Post-Nicene 
Library} (Oxford, Parker). Selections from the 
letters of Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Basil, and 
Gregory the Great are given in the same collection, 
and a larger collection of Augustine’s letters in 
vols vi and xiii of the translation of his works, edited 
by Marcus Dods (Edinburgh, 1871-76). The letters 
of St Cyprian are translated in the Oxford Library 
of the Fathers (Parker) and the Ante-Nicene Library 
(T. & T. Clark), which latter also contains the 
Martyrdom of St Perpetua and the Apology of 
Aristides (the latter in the supplementary volume, 
Edinburgh, 1897). The Mirror of Perfection has 
been translated by Sebastian Evans (London, 1899) ; 
and the Rule of St Benedict in Henderson’s Select 
Documents, already referred to. Erasmus’s earlier 
letters are translated in F. M. Nichols, The Epistles 
of Erasmus down to his fifty-first year, London, 1901. 


1 The translation is but an imperfect revision of an earlier 
one, but the notes are full and admirable. 


CHAPTER VII 


SOME SPECIAL ASPECTS OF STUDY IN 
ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 


Tue student of ecclesiastical history, then, has to 
make use of precisely the same processes and 
precisely the same kind of material as any other 
student of history. He introduces no element of 
irregularity ; he postulates no fresh laws of causa- 
tion; in fact, he would be entirely at a loss 
if there were any breach of ordinary natural 
sequence in the events which he has to investi- 
gate. Nevertheless, he cannot forget that this 
order is also a spiritual order, of the meaning and 
purpose of which he has the key. The very 
rationale of his study is to be found in the fact 
that 

“The history of Christianity is the history of 
the slow and progressive efforts which have been 
made to gain and to embody an adequate know- 
ledge of Christ in the fulness of His twofold 
nature, of the eternal revealed under the condi- 
tions of time, of the earthly raised to the heavenly, 
of the harmony that is established potentially 
between man and humanity and God, under the 

116 


116 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


continuous guiding of the living Spirit. It is 
undoubtedly a chequered and often a sad history. 
The human organs often obey most imperfectly 
the spirit which moves them. ‘There are times of 
torpor, of sloth, of disease in the Body; but even 
so the spirit is not quenched. ‘There are fallings 
away,and dismemberments, but even so an energy 
of reproduction supplies the loss. Empires rise 
and pass away, but the Church lives on, changed 
from age to age and yet the same, gathering into 
her treasure house all the prizes of wisdom and 
knowledge, and gradually learning more and more 
of the infinite import and power of the Truth 
which she has to proclaim.”? 

It is this inwardness, this manifestation of the 
Divine in the human, which gives its fundamental 
meaning to ecclesiastical history. We proceed 
then to consider in detail certain aspects of the 
study which derive their importance from this its 
essential character. 


I 


Christianity did not appear in the world with- 
out an orderly preparation: it came at the zenith 
of the history of a prepared race, as the climax of 
a process of revelation which had been manifested 
to and in some measure apprehended by that 
chosen race from very early days. It was the 
fulfilment of all that the prophets had dimly 
discerned by faith, of all that righteous souls had 

1 Westcott, Gospel of Life, p. 277. 


Some Special Aspects of Study 117 


longed after for centuries. The student cannot 
therefore overlook the preparation for the coming 
of Christ in the history of the Chosen People; he 
must not neglect the connection of Christianity 
with Judaism. He must remember, however, 
that his concern with it is historical, not theolo- 
gical or literary: that is to say, he is not con- 
cerned, at any rate primarily, with the theological 
question of the relation between the partial 
revelation made to the Jews and the full revela- 
tion of God in Christ, nor yet with the literary 
question of the relation between the books of the 
Old Testament or those of the New. On the 
other hand, the new knowledge which has been 
obtained in modern days of the history of the 
Hebrew people, partly as the result of archzo- 
logical discoveries and still more as the result of 
the application of the methods of the Higher 
Criticism,' concerns him very closely. This is of 
course a subject which cannot be entered upon 
here in detail; but whatever others may do, the 
student of history cannot hesitate to accept the 
results? which have been obtained by the very same 


1 For a wise and moderate justification of the methods of 
the Higher Criticism see George Adam Smith, Modern Criti- 
cism and the Preaching of the Old Testament, London, 1901. 

2 £.g. that the Prophets, not the Law, must be taken as 
the starting point in Hebrew history; that few of the histori- 
cal narratives were contemporaneous with the events which 
they describe ; that the books of the Hexateuch in the shape 
in which we possess them are a compilation of a late period, 
and that much of the contents of the earlier books must be 
regarded as ethnic tradition rather than as true history. 


118 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


inductive methods which have achieved such great 
triumphs in other regions of study. And it may 
be stated without hesitation that this reading of 
the history, which is now taken for granted by 
most Old Testament scholars, has brought it 
into line and into correspondence, as regards its 
fundamental features and methods of develop- 
ment, with all our other knowledge of the history 
of early peoples, without in any way detracting 
from its unique significance; and has thus 
reduced to order what was previously, from the 
historian’s point of view, nothing but chaos. 
Recognising in Judaism, then, the cradle of 
Christianity, the student of ecclesiastical history 
will be quick to notice every stage in the prepara- 
tion for the coming of Christ, every link that 
bound the new faith to the environment of its birth 
and every step of the process by which the two were 
parted asunder. He will watch for the relics of 
Jewish teaching and worship to be found in 
early Christian documents ;1 he will observe the 
not altogether unnatural animus of Jews against 
Christians from the early days of the apostles 
downward, and the part which they took in 
fomenting the persecution of Christians; he will 
notice the sad and significant change which comes 
over the language of Christians with regard to the 
chosen race as time goes on, until he reaches the 


1 For example, in the Didache. But see especially F. H. 
Chase, The Lord’s Prayer in the Early Church, Cambridge, 1891 
(Texts and Studies, i, 3). 


Some Special Aspects of Study 119 


popular outbreaks of tumult against them in the 
middle ages and the persecutions by the Inquisi- 
tions of Seville and Lisbon in the sixteenth 


century. 


Il 


If Christianity did not come unprepared into 
the world, neither did it come into a world that 
was unprepared. Christ was born “ in the fulness 
of the time”:? and it would hardly be too much 
tc say that the whole of the first century of 
Christian history is a commentary on these words. 


** No war, or battle’s sound 
Was heard the world around ; 
The idle spear and shield were high uphung ; 
The hooked chariot stood, 
Unstained with hostile blood ; 
The trumpet spake not to the arméd throng ; 
And Kings sat still with awful eye 
As if they surely knew their sovran Lord was by. 


In consecrated earth 
And on the holy hearth 
The Lars and Lemures moan with midnight plaint ; 
In urns and altars round 
A drear and dying sound 
Affrights the Flamens at their service quaint ; 
And the chill marble seems to sweat 
While each peculiar Power foregoes his wonted seat.” 


Everything that is connected with this pre- 
paration is within the range of the student of 


1 See Bishop Lightfoot's notes on Gal. iy. 4, 11. 


120 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


ecclesiastical history. He will be concerned to 
trace and follow out the causes which prepared the 
way for the propagation and the reception of the 
new religion: the decay of the old nature religions 
and the hard-and-fast boundaries of ancient 
and national tribal life, the influence of Greek 
philosophy and Roman law in developing the 
conceptions of individual duty and of universal 
law, the work of Roman conquest in preparing a 
field for the new faith and of Greek colonisation 
in rendering the spread of this faith possible 
through the medium of a common language. His 
interest in the spread of Christianity implies an 
interest in the order of life which it is supersed- 
ing: the one cannot be studied without the other. 
He will be prepared to find that the conquest was 
very slow and gradual, that for centuries there 
were survivals of the old in the new, and that the 
very conquests of the new helped to bring about 
a recrudescence of the old. 


Ill 


But Christianity has not merely a relation to 
the earlier life of Judaism out of which it sprung 
and to the Roman world within and beyond which 
it spread: it has a relation to all human religions 
as at once their crown and completion and as the 
Divine response to the human aspiration to which 
they all bear witness. Some of these have faded 
away rapidly when brought face to face with 


ahd 


Some Special Aspects of Study 121 


Christianity, their votaries seeming to find in it 
almost at once “Him whom they ignorantly 
worshipped”; others have survived in close con- 
tact with it during long centuries; one, which 
may indeed be fitly described from tae point of 
view of Christianity as a heresy rather than as a 
heathen religion,! may actually have derived some 
part of its strength from contact with a debased 
form of Christianity. But whenever and wherever 
these are brought into contact with Christianity 
they supply material for the ecclesiastical historian. 
No student of the Church history of the fourth 
century can afford to ignore the Persian religious 
systems; the student of the seventh century must 
reckon with the early Mohammedans; whilst for 
the student of the religious history of Spain or 
Sicily during the middle ages the Moors of the 
one and the Saracens of the other are all im- 
portant. The student of the records of the con- 
version of northern Europe finds himself at times 
face to face with interesting glimpses of the older 
worship; and asthe evidence from this and other 
sources is little by little being made to yield up 
its information with regard to Teutonic and Celtic 
heathendom, so this in turn sheds back light 
upon Church history. Nor is it otherwise in our 
own day. In Japan and China and India, more 


1 It has been so described by Bishop Westcott, and by 
Professor 8. Lane Poole in a valuable lecture on Jsldém, 
delivered before the Theological Faculty of Trinity College 
Dublin (Dublin, 1908). 


122 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


clearly perhaps than at home, we can see Church 
history in the making; and whenever that Church 
history comes to be written down, he who writes 
it must assuredly concern himself more carefully 
than we commonly do with the non-Christian 
religions of the East. 


ef 


The student must carefully keep in mind the 
fact, upon which stress has already been laid, that 
civil and ecclesiastical history are not two separate 
things, but simply two aspects of one and the same 
thing ; and that consequently he may never neglect 
any side of human life. The heathen writers 
Ammianus Marcellinus and Zosimus are as much 
primary authorities for him as are Eusebius and 
Lactantius; Gibbon and Hume belong as truly 
to him as they do to the historian of nations. It 
is not only that every act of human life has a 
certain spiritual significance, but that the acts 
and the motives which seem proper to the “ civil” 
and the “ecclesiastical” in reality interpenetrate 
one another in such a way as to be wholly in- 
extricable. Economic and religious causes act 
and react upon one another; or political and 
ecclesiastical causes; or the like. A few examples 
will make this clear. 

(a) As regards economics and religion. The 
tumult in Ephesus against St Paul, in which the 
multitude “cried out saying, Great is Diana of 


Some Special Aspects of Study 123 


the Ephesians,” was in reality stirred up by 
Demetrius the silversmith, and in part at any rate 
in anxiety lest the craft should suffer.1. In like 
manner, as Pliny writes to Trajan,” his action 
against the Christians stimulated the trade of 
the fodder-sellers; partly perhaps because some 
Christians recanted, but doubtless also because 
many pagans who had been slack in their religi- 
ous duties now hastened to purchase animals for 
sacrifice in order to avert suspicion. So also in 
England, in the sixteenth century, the purely 
civil question of the encouragement of the fisheries 
was mixed up with the ecclesiastical question of 
the keeping of the Friday fast.2 And things of 
_the same kind exist even in our own day. The 
writer has been told more than once by devout 
nonconformists of the way in which the religious 
life of a chapel is hampered by the fact that some 
few individuals, who have advanced the money to 
build it, have thus a proprietary control over it. 

(0) As regards politics and matters ecclesiastical. 
No honest student can deny, or should wish to 
deny, that the whole history of a Church is 
modified, partly for the better, partly for the 
worse, by the fact that it is “established.” The 

1 Acts xix. 23-41. 

2 Epist. 97. 

3 On the one hand, we have proclamations directing people 
to eat fish on Friday expressly for the sake of the fishing 
industry : on the other hand, ecclesiastical dispensations 
from fasting continue to be given. By a judicious suppres- 


sion of one part of the evidence or the other, it has been read 
in opposite ways. 


124 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


conversion of Constantine did not indeed, as Pope 
Gregory VII thought, involve the endowment of 
the papacy with the whole of Italy, nor did it 
involve the creation of a hierarchy, as Wyclif 
thought; but it undoubtedly had a profound effect 
upon the Church at large. The foundation of the 
Inquisition at Lisbon might seem to have been an 
ecclesiastical measure, and it undoubtedly had 
ecclesiastical consequences; but it was actually 
the result of causes purely fiscal.1 Froude’s 
Lectures on the Council of Trent (London, 1896), 
whatever faults they may have, at least have the 
merit of throwing into clear relief the enormous 
extent to which the proceedings in the Council 
were influenced by political considerations; and 
quite recently we have been reminded, in the 
election of Pope Pius X (August, 1903), that 
political considerations are a very strong factor 
in the making of a pope.” That they sometimes 
count for much in the choosing of bishops, or of 
the presiding persons in other religious bodies, is 
a fact which it would be easy to prove, were it 
worth while. 


1 IJ have summarised the story in the Cambridge Modern 
History, vol. II, chap. xii. It is toldat length by A. Herculano 
de Carvalho, Historia da Origem e do Estabelecimento da In- 
quizigido em Portugal, 3 vols, Lisbon, 1864-72. 

2 Whether Austria possesses a formal veto or not does not 
matter for our purpose. An informal veto would seem to be 
quite sufficient, 


Some Special Aspects of Study 125 


V 


If it is necessary to remember that the “civil” 
and the “ ecclesiastical” meet and interpenetrate 
at every point, it is not less necessary to bear in 
mind the very close relations of philosophy and 
theology, and the way in which they inevitably 
act and react upon one another. This indeed 
is almost self-evident: there is a large philo- 
sophical element in every religious system, and 
every system of philosophy is to a large extent 
the outcome of the religious feeling of the age 
which produces, or at any rate immediately pre- 
cedes it. But the historical student must do 
-more than recognise this in general terms: he 
must be prepared at every step to perceive and 
make allowance for it. The idea of development 
of doctrine, not unknown to St Vincent of Lerins,} 
has been in bad repute ever since John Henry 
Newman endeavoured to trace it by purely a priori 
methods to an end which he had already taken 
for granted. But the time has surely come now 
that it should be recognised in plain terms that 
there is such a thing as development of doctrine, 
and that it is unthinkable that it should be 
otherwise. From the historical point of view 
there are four things which stand out as facts of 
observation : 

(a) In the first place, there can be no question 


1 Commonitorium, c,. Xxili. 


126 Study of Ecclesiastical Histpry 


at all that both the whole content of doctrine, so 
to speak, of any age, and also its particular doc- 
trinal statements, differ not a little from those of 
the age which immediately preceded it, and indeed 
from those of every other. In order to see that 
this is so, we have only to compare the theological 
writings of any one age with those of any other, or 
of our own. There will be much, no doubt, which 
we can adopt without any conscious effort; some- 
thing also that we can assimilate, not without 
conscious effort, but with a sense that our own 
concepts have thereby been widened and deep- 
ened, and that we are richer as the result of the 
process. But there will be much more which 
we cannot accept at all; part of which has ceased 
to have any meaning whatever for us, whilst the 
rest we must needs reject as false. 

(6) Moreover, this variation of doctrine is 
neither inconsequent nor arbitrary: it has a law 
of growth corresponding with that of the Body. 
Not indeed that the doctrine of each age can be 
said to be a direct advance upon that of the 
preceding one, or that the doctrine of each 
teacher is a direct advance upon that of his 
predecessor. It is often quite the reverse. ‘The 
deep spiritual idea of one age is exaggerated 
and distorted in the next; the reaction from 
one mode of thought goes far in the opposite 
direction ; theological ‘ tendency ” which is true 
in its proper proportion leads in the limit to 
negation of all else, as the top of a twig departs 


Some Special Aspects of Study 127 


further and further from the parent stem. Never- 
theless, the consecutiveness of doctrine is clear 
throughout: there is nothing merely fortuitous 
or inconsequent; and, viewed on a large scale, 
there is continuous and united growth in it 
which makes a history of doctrine no mere 
collection of isolated details, but one true whole. 
There is such a thing as the development of 
doctrine: of course it may be true and perfect, 
or it may be one-sided, stunted, and perverted ; 1 
but it is undoubtedly always there, and could 
never be absent. 

(c) Furthermore, there is one feature of this 
development of Christian doctrine which distin- 
guishes it from everything else. In a very real 
sense it is a growth backwards. ‘There are of 
course temporary and local aberrations, but the 
thing which can hardly fail to strike the historian 
is that every “ critical point” in the development 
of doctrine is an attempt at any rate, however 
unsuccessful it may be, to realise afresh or vindi- 
cate afresh some element in or some aspect of the 
primitive revelation. How far as a matter of 
fact such developments are really faithful to the 
original deposit is of course a question upon which 
only detailed historical inquiry can throw light. 
But that practically every new teaching makes the 
claim to be so is simply a matter of experience ; 


1 See Bishop Gore, The Test of Theological and Ecclesias- 
tical Development: Church Historical Society’s Publications, 
No. Ixiii. 


128 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


and unless in the long run such teachings at any 
rate satisfy the Christian consciousness (rightly or 
wrongly) that they bear this character, they die 
away. In other words, here as elsewhere, develop- 
ment is orderly, not capricious; and Christian 
doctrine looks not forward into the unknown, but 
backward to the Person of Christ. The revelation 
in Christ is, in the minds of all Christian teachers, 
not partial but complete, not a stage in the un- 
veiling of truth but Absolute Truth. Growth is 
regarded as growth from Him and unto Him; so 
that the ultimate test which is applied by all 
Christian teachers alike to all Christian doctrine 
alike is that of fidelity to the revelation in Christ. 

(d) But if there is an underlying unity in the 
growth of Christian doctrine, there is likewise, as 
we have seen, an element which is peculiar to 
each single age. It is inevitable that this should 
be so; for if doctrine be the expression of the 
Faith in terms of thought, it follows that this 
expression will have in every age an element 
which is peculiar to that age, and which must 
of necessity pass away with that age. As Dr 
Salmon has said, the theologians of every age 
have sought to combine 

“The doctrines which they learned from re- 
velation with the results of what they regarded 
as the best philosophy of their own day, so as 
to obtain what seemed to them the most satis- 


1 Compare A. M. Fairbairn, Christ in Modern Theology, 
London, 1893, p. 200. 


“ 
é 
* 


Some Special Aspects of Study 129 


factory account and explanation of the facts of 
the universe.” 

In this fact is to be found the explanation of the 
perpetual and apparently meaningless disputes 
which are ever going on in the realm of theology. 
‘They are simply the result of successive attempts 
to bring it into line with its new environment: to 
eliminate the philosophical elements which have 
become effete and merely traditional, and once 
more to express the old truths in the language of 
the new thought. It is likewise the explanation 
of every so-called conflict of religion with science. 
As Dr Salmon goes on, 

“Every union of philosophy and religion is 
the marriage of a mortal with an immortal; the 
religion lives; the philosophy grows old and dies. 
When the philosophic element of a theological 
system becomes antiquated, its explanations, 
which contented one age, become unsatisfactory 
to the next, and then ensues what is spoken 
of as a conflict between religion and science; 
whereas, in reality, it is a conflict between the 
science of one generation and that of the preced- 
ing generation.” 

‘The student of ecclesiastical history will be 
prepared, then, to find such a philosophical . 
element in all doctrine, and such a development 
of doctrine: not as a law which is to bind him, 
but as a generalisation based on the combined 
experience of other students. Here, as elsewhere, - 

* Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. ii. p. 678, art. 


** Gnosticism.” 
I 


130 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


he must be prepared at all times to test his con- 
clusions by the light of new evidence; and the 
more faithfully he does this, the more those con- 
clusions, in their ultimate form, will be found to 
be no mere result of a mental process peculiar to 
himself, but the orderly statement of the facts, 
and the interpretation of them in terms which, if 
not universal, are at least common to the age and 
the civilisation of which he forms part. 


VE 


Another feature of the life of the Church which 
will need very careful study is its canonical 
system. There are few subjects which are more 
talked about, and with a greater lack of know- 
ledge, than the Canon Law, that great series of 
canonical regulations which by the twelfth and 
following centuries had grown into the most 
elaborate and complex system of law, perhaps, 
that the world had ever seen. The student of 
the history of the middle ages soon begins to 
realise that in practice this great system was 
by no means so universal or so uniform in its 
operation as it seemed. The medieval mind 
was essentially synthetic; it loved an all-em- 
bracing logical system, which provided for every 
case and dealt with each with the greatest 
minuteness and on the highest authority. But 
it also loved its own way; and consequently in 
practice this great system was never strictly carried 
out, thanks to the various counterpoises which 


Some Special Aspects of Study 131 


existed. ‘here was always some loophole: it 
might be evaded by a dispensation, or by the 
intervention of the law’s endless delays until 
death brought the contention to a close; or 
by tacit consent, or by private treaty, or by 
the interference of the civil power, or even by 
an open appeal to force. Nevertheless, there is 
a widespread tendency to treat this “ great store- 
house of good advice,” as Bishop Creighton has 
called it,! not only as if it had been always and 
everywhere carried into effect just as it stood in 
the law-books of the canonists, but as if it were 
of the very essence of the Church, and had in 
effect existed from the very beginning. Nothing, 
of course, could well be further from the truth. 
It is not merely that the great bulk of the actual 
provisions of the Corpus Juris Canonici are late 
in date, or that the canonical system of the West 
differs from that of the East, or that of any one 
day from that of any other day. The very idea 
of “the Canon Law” as a binding system of 
legislation is essentially medieval. It would 
have been unthinkable in early days; to an 
Eastern, the very idea is paradoxical to-day, and 
the phrase xavoviKos voyos a contradiction in 
terms.2 It is the outcome of a condition of 
things in which the Church was regarded as a 
State on the analogy of the Empire, with a body 
of law analogous to the civil law, deriving its 


1 The Abolition of the Roman Jurisdiction, Church Historical 
Society’s Publications, No. vii, p. 9. 

2 As I have been told by more than one clergyman of the 
Orthodox Eastern Church. 


132 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


force not from the consent of those who keep the 
law, but from the authority of the supreme legis- 
lator, the Pope.1 Apart from this, the whole 
idea loses its force. 

The fact is that “ Canon Law” is largely crys- 
tallised and codified practice: a statement of the 
way in which things are done, not of the way in 
which they ought to be done. The Church did 
not start, any more than the Hebrew people did, 
with an elaborate code of laws which it forthwith 
proceeded to put into practice. From the first it 
had an essential character and certain essential 
principles, not explicitly set forth but implied in 
its very nature. When need arose for action, it 
acted as best it could in accordance with these. 
When the same circumstances arose again, it 
naturally acted in the same way; and thus there 
grew up by degrees a regular customary pro- 
cedure. Then, when new circumstances seemed 
to require new action, action was taken in accord- 
ance with this customary procedure. When 
necessary also local churches met together in 
council and dealt with particular cases as they 
arose by means of canons: canons which primarily 
applied only to special cases or classes of cases, 
but which naturally came to be followed else- 
where if they were found in experience to be suit- 
able and wise: if otherwise, they were laid aside 
and forgotten when they had done their parti- 
cular work. The passing of the centuries added 


1 See my Nature and Force of the Canon Law, Church His- 
torical Society’s Publications, No. xxxiy. 


Some Special Aspects of Study 133 


not a little, of course, both to the amount and 
the value of this codified experience, but at the 
same time it made more and more of it obsolete 
and unworkable; so that no lapse of time ever 
did or could do away with the liberty of the 
Church in setting aside or modifying former 
methods, or in taking fresh action in view of new 
circumstances. 

Now all this may be summed up in a sentence 
which should be borne carefully in mind: prin- 
ciples precede practice, and practice precedes theory. 
The student who forgets this will never attain to 
true views of the history of the Church; he who 
bears it in mind will find in the Corpus Juris 
Canonici and other similar collections an unfailing 
source of illustrative evidence, of a kind that is 
sometimes invaluable. 


Vil 


One of the difficulties which dog the footsteps of 
the student of ecclesiastical history is to know how 
to interpret the marvels and portents of which many 
of his authorities are full. The difficulty is not, of 
course, one which touches him alone; for things of 
the kind are neither peculiar to, nor especially char- 
acteristic of, the writings of ecclesiastics or be- 
lievers. They have a not inconsiderable place in all 
early records, and must be considered and weighed 
by every student of the facts. But they concern the 
student of ecclesiastical history in a special degree 
because, from its very nature, the question is one 


ial 
i 


134 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


which touches the spiritual side of life most 
closely. How then is it to be solved ? 

There are two aspects of the question which 
may with advantage be considered separately. 
(a) There is that of evidence. Some of the 
“evidence” with which we have to do is plainly 
of very little value. It comes to us, not in the 
shape of a continuous narrative, but as an isolated 
story; it is plainly not contemporary, from the 
anachronisms which it contains; it seems to have 
been compiled with an obvious purpose ; its inter- 
nal character is such that, if we were brought 
face to face with a similar story to-day, in matters 
which concern our daily life, we should not trust 
it. It is, in other words, what may be con- 
veniently described as legend. How are we to 
treat material of this character? ‘There is a 
difficulty at the outset in the fact that it is not 
easy to draw a hard-and-fast line between material 
such as this and the work of an inaccurate 
and untrustworthy narrator. But the difference, 
nevertheless, is very real, and it is not one of dégree 
only but of kind. The first thing to be done, 
therefore, is to determine which of the two it is. 
But when we have decided that the material is 
nothing but a legend, what is to be done with it ? 
The answer is that we cannot use it for historical 
purposes. We may, indeed, read it as a legend, 
connected with our subject, and throwing light 
upon the character of the people amongst whom 
it originated though not on their history;* but 


1 As Freeman has used it in his Old English History. 


Some Special Aspects of Study 1385 


that is all. It probably is based on some fact, but 
we cannot interpret it, for we do not know the law 
which underlies its formation: it is, in Niebuhr’s 
words, “a mirage produced by an invisible object 
according to an unknown law of refraction.” For 
instance, in a very large number of parishes all 
over England it is told that the church was 
despoiled by Oliver Cromwell, so many in fact 
that if he had done nothing else he would have 
had plenty to occupy his time. And yet we know 
that he did nothing of the sort. The allegation 
may represent something, but it tells us—nothing. 
So with other legends. Some of the alleged 
events may have happened; but history is not 
concerned with what may have happened; else 
we might all fill in the meagre outlines of any 
narrative out of our own imaginations.!_ Least of 
all may we neglect the fantastic or marvellous 
elements as untrue and accept the rest; for the 
evidence for one part of the story is at any rate 
no worse and no better than that for the other; 
and+such a process, it has been said, would be 
like rejecting Puss in Boots and accepting the 
Marquis of Carabas as an historical character.? 
(6) There remains, however, a very great deal 
which cannot possibly be explained on grounds 
such as these: chronicles, for instance, which are 
contemporary or practically contemporary, in 
which marvels of all sorts are described with just 


1 As the younger Froude did in the work which he contri- 
buted to Newman’s series of Lives of the English Saints. 
2 Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., p. 183. 


136 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


the same naturalness and unconsciousness of effect 
as any other part of the narrative, and often, as 
in Beda, with the most careful naming of witnesses 
and informants, &c. What then is to be said with 
regard to things such as these? ‘The answer must 
be twofold. (1) Marvels are described by such 
writers with absolute naturalness and truthfulness 
simply because they were so absolutely natural 
and real to them. Life was full of marvels, and 
the marvellous thing would have been if they had 
not been recorded. It does not indeed follow that 
we should have seen them had we been there, or 
that if so we should have found them as incapable 
of explanation by natural causes as people then 
did: that is a matter which can only be decided 
by a consideration of al/ the antecedent cireum- 
stances, natural and spiritual! They may or 
may not have had an objective reality. But any- 
how, there they are: they are as much part of 
the life of the peoples concerned as their actions 
are, or their beliefs; and the historian has but to 
investigate and record. (2) And they may truly 
have had the character of signs (oneia) without 
being supernatural events; for a oneiov is rela- 
tive to him who gives and to him who receives it, 
and does not depend on the method by which it is 
given. That oneia do occur nowadays is a matter 
of experience. The man who asserts the con- 
trary on the ground that he has never experienced 
anything of the sort has no more right to deny 


1 See Illingworth, Reason and Revelation, chap. viii, “ The 
Modern View of Christian Evidence.” 


Some Special Aspects of Study 137 


this on the basis of his lack of experience than 
the man who is colour-blind has the right to deny 
the existence of colour; and his denial has even 
less weight if he is the kind of man who is not 
antecedently likely to be influenced by any but 
material considerations. If then there are signs in 
our own day for those who have eyes to see, we have 
a right to believe that there were such then; and 
if we see that the marvels which are recorded by 
witnesses were followed by the appropriate effects 
in the lives of those who witnessed them, we need 
not hesitate to allow this character to them, what- 
ever their actual objective nature may have been.! 


Vil 


One other point remains to be touched upon. 
The student cannot go far without noticing what 
is one of the saddest and yet (from another point of 
view) one of the most glorious facts about the 
Church: viz. the vast difference between its destiny 
and the spirit which ever strives for the mastery in 
it. On the one hand, sad as it is to have to confess 
it, it is nevertheless true that the representatives of 
the Church have not in all ages been on the side 
of progress in times of change, nor have they, as 
a rule, been ready to claim what was good as 

1 The argument of John Henry Newman in his “ Essay on 
Ecclesiastical Miracles,” prefixed to his translation of part of 
the Abbé Fleury’s Lcclesiastical History, Oxford, 1842, cannot 
be considered very satisfactory. But there is an admirable 
discussion of the historical value of documents containing 


miracles and prodigies in Dom C. Butler, The Lausiac History of 
Palladius, Cambridge, 1898, vol. i, § 15 ( Texts and Studies, vi. 1) 


138 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


belonging to the Church by right. Usually there 
has been a willingness to meet new truths with 
worn-out philosophical weapons, to stifle inquiry 
with dogma, and to reject much that was 
because it did not fit in with established canons 
of thought. Neither in the sphere of life nor in 
that of thought can it be said that the contention 
of those who represented the Church was such as 
to win our whole-hearted sympathy: sometimes 
the very reverse is the case. ‘There is no need to 
give instances: the facts are patent. 

And yet in the long run everything that is 
good in the new order, whether in poetry or 
philosophy, in science or in morals, has at length 
gained its true home in the bosom of the Church. 
The facts which were regarded with jealous eyes, 
as endangering the Faith, have in the end been 
accepted and found to form new bulwarks of 
that Faith; all that is really good and true and 
enduring, reject it as we might, has ultimately 
proved to be ours. If we looked merely at our 
own age we might find much to make us doubtful 
and anxious; but if we look back over the past, 
we can no longer fail to see that the Church of 
the Living God is indeed the heir of all the ages. 
He who has come to see this will not have studied 
Ecclesiastical History in vain. 


For books bearing upon the subjects here dealt 
with, see Section II of the following chapter. 


CHAPTER VIII 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Ir is no part of the plan of this little volume to 
attempt to offer to the student anything like com- 
plete or systematic guidance with regard either 
to the contemporary documents or the modern 
works for the study of particular subjects in 
ecclesiastical history. The best work of the kind 
in existence is that of C. de Smedt, Jntroductio 
generalis ad historiam ecclesiasticam, Gand, 1876, 
which must always have a considerable value 
on account of its wide range, its thoroughness, 
and its systematic arrangement. As an actual 
working bibliography for the student of any par- 
ticular period, however, it can have been of little 
use from the first, and it is now very largely out 
of date so far as modern works are concerned. 
Still, it is the best book of the kind that we have. 

In point of fact, the range of subjects in Church 
history is so wide, and the literature, both ancient 
and modern, is so vast that any such plan would 
be impossible within the limits of the space at 
his disposal, even if the present writer were 
capable of attempting it. But there are other 
reasons too, on account of which it would hardly 
be worth attempting. For one thing the rate at 
which books are published nowadays is so great 

139 


~ oy é ; 7" 
140 Study of Ecclesiastical History : 


that a systematic bibliography of modern litera- 
ture would be almost out of date from the day of 
its publication. Then again, such a list of books, 
unless it were practically exhaustive, would not 
be likely to be helpful unless it were made with 
a view of supplying the needs of some particular 
class of student, in which case it would not be of 
much use to other students. But in point of fact 
the enterprising reader, if he can have occasional 
recourse to a good library, will soon discover 
for himself what are the available books upon 
any subject, and to judge between the good and 
the bad. No doubt he will occasionally make 
mistakes, but he will profit by his very mistakes, 
and meanwhile he will be acquiring information 
and learning to judge of books as he can in no 
other way. The material that he will make use 
of in the course of his investigations is almost 
endless. Most systematic books on Church his- 
tory give lists of authorities, besides what is 
contained in the notes, and the same sort of 
help will be found at the end of articles in the 
various historical and theological dictionaries. 
Subject-indexes of various kinds and systematic 
catalogues of libraries are sometimes useful; and 
so, to a much larger extent, are the chronicles 
of new books which appear from time to time, 
either in a separate form? or in the various 
historical and theological magazines. Each book 
or list that he consults will lead the student on 


1The most valuable of these is the classified “ Monthly 
List” of books published in Europe and America, It is 


Bibliography 141 


to others; and before long he will find that the 
difficulty is not so much to procure information 
as to master that which is already within his 
reach. 

All that will be attempted in this chapter, 
therefore, will be to give the merest sketch list 
of books on various subjects, together with a few 
hints to facilitate the use of them. English books 
will be chosen as far as possible. 


I 


The following are some of the chief dictionaries 
and encyclopaedias which may be consulted !: 


Dictionary of Christian Antiquities and Dictionary of 
Christian Biography. 

Dictionary of National Biography. 

F. Cabrol, Dictionnaire de l’archéologie Chrétienne et 
de la Liturgie, Paris, 1901 f. (In progress. 
Promises to be the largest and best work of 
the kind in existence.) 

Herzog, Plitt, and Hauck, Real-Encyklopddie fiir 
protestantische Theologie und Kirche. Third 
Edition. (In progress. An abridged trans- 
lation of the second edition with additions, 
edited by Philipp Schaff, Edinburgh, T. & T. 
Clark, is sometimes useful.) 

Pauly and Wissowa, Real-Encyklopddie der classischen 
Alterthumsnissenschaft, Vienna. (In progress.) 

issued by Messrs Tauchnitz of Leipzig, but can be obtained 


of Mr David Nutt, Messrs Williams & Norgate, or Messrs 
Deighton & Bell. 
1 A Dictionary of Religion on a large scale is announced, 
to be edited by F. Hastings ; but it is not likely to see the 
. light for some time. 


142 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


A. Vacant, Dictionnaire de la Théologie, Paris, 1901 f. 
(In progress. On the same scale as the 
work of Cabrol mentioned above.) 

Wetzer, Welte, and Kaulen, Kirchenlexikon oder 
Encyklopiidie der katholischen Theologie, Frei- 
burg, 1883 f. 


See also the following works in general bibliography : 


R. Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs sacrés et 
ecclésiastiques, new edition, Paris, 1858-69. 
(In chronological order.) 

U. Chevalier, Répertoire des sources historiques du 
moyen-dge, Paris, 1883, &c. (The first part is 
biographical, giving under each name refer- 
ences to all the chief sources and modern 
writings in which the person referred to is 
mentioned ; the second part, which treats the 
names of places in the same way, is in course 
of publication. ) 

A. Ebert, Allgemeine Geschichte der Litteratur des 
Mittelalters im Abendland, 3 vols, Leipzig, 
1874-87. 

J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca sive Notitia 
Scriptorum Veterum Graecorum, &e., ed. 4, by 
T. C. Harles, 12 vols, Hamburg, 1790-1809 ; 
index (imperfect), Leipzig, 1837. (On the 
same general lines as Ceillier.) 

J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Latina, ed. J. D. Mansi 
and I. A. Ernesti, Leipzig, 1773, 6 vols in 
3, or Florence, 1858. (Largely superseded 
by Chevalier but still useful.) 

A. Potthast, Bibliotheca historica Medti Aevi, second 
edition, Berlin, 1896. (An invaluable book, 
giving in alphabetical order the chief writers 


Bibliography 143 


and anonymous writings of the middle ages, 
with particulars as to manuscripts, editions, 
and modern works relating to them.) 

W. S. Teuffel, History of Roman Literature, ed. L. 
Schwabe, translated with large additions by 
G, C. Warr, 2 vols, London, 1891-2. 


The following books, many of which are of course 
of the highest value in themselves, are mentioned 
here on account of the bibliographical help which 
they will afford to the student : 


Annals of England [By W. E. F(laherty)], Lon- 
don, 1876. (With full list of chronicles, &c. : 
a convenient book of reference.) 

P. Batiffol, La Littérature Grecque, Paris, 1897. 
(Greek Christian literature down to the 
fourth century.) 

The Cambridge Modern History. (Very full biblio- 
graphies of documents and modern works at 
the end of each volume.) 

F. C. Dahlmann, G. Waitz, and E. Steindorff, Quel- 
lenkunde der deutschen Geschichte, Gottingen, 
1894. (A chronological bibliography of Ger- 
man history. 

J. G. Dowling, Notitia scriptorum ss. patrum et 
aliorum veteris ecclesiae monumentorum, Oxford, 
1839. (Giving a full list of the contents of 
fifty great collections of patristic and other 
documents, which had been published down 
to that date.) 

S. R. Gardiner and J. B. Mullinger, Introduction 
to the Study of English History, third edition, 


; | “ar, ' 
4 > , 


144 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


London, 1894. (The second part deals-with 
the sources and modern works. ) 

J. Gillow, Bibliographical Dictionary of English 
[Roman] Catholics, 5 vols, London, 1885-1902. 

C. Gross, Sources and Literature of English History 
to about 1485, London, 1900. 

G. Kriiger, History of Early Christian Literature, 
tr. by C. R. Gillett, London, 1897. 

W. Moeller, History of the Christian Church, 3 vols, 
1892-1900. (To 1648. Most valuable for 
references to documents and modern works, 
and especially to the latest work scattered 
through German and other periodicals. ) 

A. Molinier, Les Sources de ’ histoire de France, Paris, 
1901 f. (Three vols published, to 1328.) 

H. B. Swete, Patristic Study, London, 1902. 

T. Wright, Bibliographia Britannica literaria, 2 vols, 
London, 1842-6. 


In addition to these, the Subject-Index of Modern 
Works added to the Library of the British Museum 
since 1880, edited by G. K. Fortescue, will be found 
very useful; and even more so is the Catalogue of 
the London lanes edited by C. T. Hagbert Wright, 
London, 1903. This latter not only contains the 
names of a very large collection of books (about 
220,000) but gives full lists of the contents of a 
great many collections, such as Migne’s Patrologia, 
the Coleccién de documentos inéditos, and of the pub- 
lications of a great many societies and clubs. Owing 
to this, and to its convenience of arrangement and 
abundant cross-references, it is one of the most 
convenient bibliographical collections that we 
possess. 


wt 


Bibliography 145 


II 


The following books will be found useful for study 
under the special heads referred to in Chapter VII. 
The student will of course bear in mind the fact 
that the books are written from very different stand- 
points, for which allowance must be made, and that 
he must read carefully and discriminatingly. 


1. JupaismM AND CHRISTIANITY. 


G. H. A. von Ewald, History of Israel, 8 vols, 
London, 1867-86 (especially vols vi-viii). 

H. Graetz, History of the Jews, 5 vols, London, 
1891-2. 

C. G. Montefiore, Religion of the Ancient Hebrens, 
London, 1892. 

A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the Jenish Church, 3 vols, 
London, many editions. (Largely superseded, 
but still useful if read with care.) 

J. J. I. von Doellinger, Heidenthum und Judenthum, 
Ratisbon, 1857. (Translated into English as 
The. Gentile and the Jew, 2 vols, London, 
1862.) 

A. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 
2 vols, London, 1883. 

A. Edersheim, History of the Jenish Nation, ed. 
H. A. White, London, 1896. 

A. Hausrath, History of New Testament Times, 
6 vols, London, 1878-95. 

E. Schiirer, History of the Jewish People in the Time 
of Christ, 6 vols, Edinburgh, 1890-91. 

J. B. Lightfoot, Epistle to the Colossians, Lon- 

K 






Bn Ns so 
> Pas 


146 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


don, many editions: dissertation on “The 
Essenes.” 


2. Tue HeatruHen Wortp anp CuRISTIANITY. 


Doellinger, Hausrath, and Schiirer ut supra. 

L. Friedlinder, Sillengeschichte Roms, seventh edi- 
tion, Leipzig, 1901. 

J. B. Lightfoot, Epistle to the Philippians, London, 
many editions: dissertation on “St Paul and 
Seneca.” 

H. J. S. Maine, Ancient Law, London, many 
editions. 

J. Marquardt and T. Mommsen, Handbuch der 
romischen Alterthiimer, 7 vols, Leipzig, 1874— 
1884. 

C. Merivale, History of the Romans under the 

Empire, 8 vols, London, 1865, ete. 
. Mommsen, The Roman Provinces from Cesar to 
Diocletian, 2 vols, London, 1886. 
Dill, Roman Society in the Last Century of the 
Western Empire, London, 1898. 
K. Franke, Stoicismus und Christenthum, Breslau, 
1876. 

G. Boissier, La religion romaine d Auguste aux 

G 

F 


lar} 


wn 


Antonins, 2 vols, Paris, 1892. 

. Boissier, La fin du paganisme, 2 vols, Paris, 
1891. 

. Granger, The Worship of the Romans, London, 
1895. 


3. CHRISTIANITY AND OTHER RELIGIONS. 


R. S. Copleston, Buddhism, London, 1892. 
S. Lane-Poole, Siudies in a Mosque, London, 1883. 


Bibliography 147 


S. Legge, The Religions of China compared nith 
Christianity, London, 1880. 

L. Krehl, Mohammed's Leben, Leipzig, 1884 

W. Muir, Life of Mahomet, third edition, London, 
1894. 

W. Muir, The Early Caliphate, London, 1891. 

Non-Christian Religious Systems, London, S.P.C.K., 
various years. 

A. M. Fairbairn, The Philosophy of the Christian 
Religion, London, 1902. 

C. Hardwick, Christ and other Masters, London, 
1859. 

B. F. Westcott, The Gospel of Life, London, 1892. 


. CuristTIAN DocTrINE AND PHILosoPHy. 


A. Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, ed. A. Harnack, 
Breslau, 1897. 
Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 3 vols, London, 
1882 f. 
. Kattenbusch, Das apostolische Symbol, 2 vols, 
Leipzig, 1894, 1900. 
. E. Burn, /ntroduction to the Creeds, London, 1899. 
A. Dorner, Development of the Doctrine of the 
Person of Christ, 5 vols, Edinburgh, 1861 f. 
K. R. Hagenbach, History of Christian Doctrines, 
3 vols, Edinburgh, 1880-81. 

A. Harnack, History of Dogma, 7 vols, London, 
1894-99. 

E. Hatch, Influence of Greek Ideas upon the Church, 
fifth edition, London, 1895. 

F. Loofs, Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmen- 
geschichte, Halle, 1893. 


ol eee mee 





148 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


J. B. Hauréau, De la philosophie scholastique, 2 — 
vols, Paris, 1850. 

J. B, Hauréau, Histoire de la philosophie scholas- 
taque, 3 vols, Paris, 1872-80. 

R. L. Poole, Illustrations of the History of Medieval 
Thought, London, 1884. 

J. Tulloch, Rational Theology in England during the 
Seventeenth Century, 2 vols, Edinburgh, 1872. 

L. Stephen, History of English Thought in the 
Eighteenth Century, 2 vols, London, 1881. 


5. Canon Law, &c. 


Decretales pseudo - Isidorianae, ed. P. Hinschius, 
Leipzig, 1863. 

Quinque compilationes antiquae, ed. H. Friedberg, 

: Leipzig, 1882. 

Corpus Juris Canonici, ed. . Friedberg, 2 vols, 
Leipzig, 1879-81. 

J. D. Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplis- 
sima Collectio, Florence and Venice, 1759 f. 

W. Beveridge, Synodikon sive Pandectae Conciliorum 
ab Ecclesia Graeca receptorum, 2 vols, Oxford, 
1672. 

G. A. Ralli and M. Potli, 2vvraypa trav Gedy Kai 
iepov Kavovev, 5 vols, Athens, 1852 f. 

A. Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Chris- 
tenthums, Leipzig, 1902. 

P. Hinschius, Das Kirchenrecht der Katholiken und 
Protestanten, 7 vols, Berlin, 1869-97. 

F. Maassen, Geschichte der Quellen des canonischen 
Rechts, Gratz, 1870. 

G. Phillips, Kirchenrecht, 8 vols, Regensburg, 
1851, &e. 


Bibliography 149 


J. F. von Schulte, Lehrbuch des Katholischen Kir- 
chenrechts, fourth edition, Stuttgart, 1886. 

J. F. von Schulte, Geschichte der Quellen des Kir- 
chenrechts, Stuttgart, 1875. 

R. Sohm, Kirchenrecht, Leipzig, 1892. 

L. Thomassin, Vetus et nova ecclesiae disciplina, 
Venice, 1773. 

Z. B. Van Espen, Scripta omnia and Supplementum, 
Louvain, 1753, and Paris, 1768. 


6. Lirurerrs, &c. 


E. Martene, De antiquis ecclestae ritibus, Venice, 
1783. 

L. A. Muratori, Liturgia Romana vetus, 2 vols, 
Venice, 1748. 

F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, 
vol. i (Eastern), Oxford, 1896. 

H. Denzinger, Ritus orientalium, Wiirtzburg, 1863. 

M. Magistretti, La Liturgia della Chiesa Milanese 
nel Secolo IV, Milan, 1899. 

M. Magistretti, Beroldus, Milan, 1894. 

P. Batiffol, Histotre du bréviaire romain, Paris, 
1895. 

L. Duchesne, Origines du culte chrétien, third 
edition, Paris, 1902. (English translation 
by M. L. McClure, London, 1902.) 

J. Wordsworth, The Ministry of Grace, London, 
1901. 


7. MisceLttaNeous: Tue Papacy, &c. 


Liber Pontificalis, ed. L. Duchesne, 2 vols, Paris, 
1886-92. (The great collection of bio- 





graphies, &c., of Roman popes till towards — a 


the end of the ninth century. A new edition 
by Mommsen is appearing in the Monumenta 
Germaniae Historiae.) 

J. Langen, Geschichte der rimischen Kirche, 4 vols, 
Bonn, 1881-1893. (By far the best general 
treatment in existence of the rise of the 
Papal power. Goes down to Innocent III.) 

F. Bohringer, Die Kirche Christi, Kirchengeschichte 
in Biographieen, 24 vols, Ziirich, &e., 1864-79. 
(Useful on account of its detailed treatment.) 

F. W. Puller, The Primitive Saints and the See of 
Rome, third edition, London, 1900. 

W. Bright, The Roman See in the Early Church, 
London, 1896. 

A. Robertson, Roman Claims to Supremacy, London, 
1897. (Church Historical Society’s Publica- 
tions, No, xiii.) 

C. J. von Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, 10 vols, 
Freiburg, 1855-90. (Down to Constance and 
Basel: the later volumes are in part the work 
of J. Hergenréther. An English translation 
down to a.p. 787, 5 vols, Edinburgh, 1871-96.) 

S. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, Paris, 1893. 

B. F. Westcott, The Bible in the Church, London, 
many editions. 

J. A. Méhler, Symbolism: Doctrinal Differences 
between Catholics and Protestants, 2 vols, 
London, 1843 (and later editions). 

F. D. Maurice, The Kingdom of Christ, 2 vols, 
London, fourth edition, 1891. 

A. J. Mason, The Relation of Confirmation to Bap- 
tism, London, 1891. 


q 


Bibliography 151 


J. Morinus, De sacris ecclesiae ordinationibus, Ant- 
werp, 1695. 

H. B. Swete, History of the Doctrine of the Procession 
of the Holy Spirit, Cambridge, 1876. 


On a number of points of detail, especially such 
as have been made the subject of controversy, refer- 
ence should be made to the publications of the 
Church Historical Society (London, S.P.C.K.). A 
detailed list may be obtained from the Secretary, 
Church Historical Society, Sion College, London, E.C. 


Ill 


It must of course be remembered that any division 
of history into periods is only made for purposes 
of convenience, since history is continuous. But 
the following suggestions and lists of books dealing 
with special periods of Church history may be found 
useful by the student: 


1. Earty Cuurcu History To THE ACCESSION OF 
Grecory THE Great (a.D. 594). 


Gibbon is of course indispensable; so are the 
great dictionaries (above, p. 141). The great 
work of L. S. Le Nain de Tillemont, Mémoires 
pour servir a Uhistoire ecclésiastique des 6 
premiers siécles, 16 vols, Paris, 1710-12, is. 
still useful owing to its laborious fulness. 
Of the general Church histories, Neander, 
Langen, Schaff, and Moeller are perhaps the 
most useful. 


F. J. A. Hort, The Christian Ecclesia, London, 1897. 






& 
o_ 


152 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


F. J. A. Hort, Judaistic Christianity, Cambridge, 
1894. 

F. J. A. Hort, Six Lectures on the ante-Nicene 
Fathers, London, 1895. 

J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 5 vols, . 
London, 1885-90 (invaluable). | 

J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, lesser 
edition, London, 1891. 

H. L. Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, London, 1875. 

W. M. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, 

Cc 

e 


London, many editions. (Very suggestive.) 

. Merivale, Conversion of the Roman Empire, second 
edition, London, 1865. 

. Allard, Histotre des persécutions, 5 vols, Paris, 
1892, &c. (The fullest treatment of the 
subject that we possess.) 

P. Allard, Le Christianisme et l'empire romain de 
Néron a@ Théodore, Paris, 1896. (A good 
summary.) 

C. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria, 
Oxford, 1896. 

E. W. Benson, Cyprian, London, 1897. 

A. de Broglie, L’Eglise et l'empire romain au 4° 

siecle, 6 vols, Paris, 1856-66. 
. M. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, Cambridge, 
1882. 

Robertson, Athanasius, Oxford, 1892. (Nicene 

and post-Nicene Library.) 

Allard, Julien  Apostat, 3 vols, Paris, 1900-3. 

. Bright, The Age of the Fathers, 2 vols, Oxford, 

1903. 
. R. W. Stephens, Life of St Chrysostom, London, 
1902. 


a> . P a 


Bibliography 153 


J. McCabe, St Augustine of Hippo, London, 1902. 
(Well written, but biased.) 

W. S. Crawfurd, Synesius the Hellene, London, 1901. 

C. Gore, Leo the Great, London [1880]. 

W. H. Hutton, Church in the Siath Century, London, 
1897. 

C. Diehl, Justinien, Paris, 1901. 

F. J. Foakes Jackson, History of the Church to 451, 
second edition, Cambridge, 1897. (This and 
the two following are text-books.) 

S. Cheetham, History of the Christian Church to 
600 a.p., London, 1894. 

L. Pullan, History of Early Christianity, London, 
1893. (To the third century.) 

See also the Suggestions for the Study of Early 
Church History, by the present writer (Church 
Historical Society’s Publications, No. Ixxvi, 
price 4d), where the subject is dealt with 
on a much fuller scale. 


. From THE Accession oF GREGORY THE GREAT TO 
THE Rise oF HILDEBRAND (a.D. 1054). 


The general Church histories in English are not 
very good for this period. Moeller, however, 
is invaluable, as also is Langen, for its own 
special subject. We lose the guidance of the 
Dictionary of Christian Biography after a.v. 
800. 

P. Jatfé, Regesta pontificum Romanorum ad annum 
1198, ed. G. Wattenbach, &c., 2 vols, Leipzig, 
1885-98. (Précis of papal documents; an 
invaluable source of information from this 
time forward ) 


nee. g hte -! ee 
“ aha f . 
ms bP a 


154 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


J. A. G. von Pflugk-Harttung, Acta pontificum 
Romanorum inedita, 3 vols, Tiibingen and 
Stuttgart, 1881-1888. (Gives the text of 
documents hitherto inedited.) 

J. M. Watterich, Pontificum Romanorum vitae ab 
aequalibus conscriptae, 2 vols, Leipzig, 1862. 
(Contains contemporary lives of the popes from 
872-1099 : an attempt to supply the place left 
vacant by the cessation of the Liber Pontificalis. ) 

J. F. Boehmer (and others), Regesta imperii, Inns- 
briick, 1889, &e. (Précis of imperial docu- 
ments. ) 

W, Altmann and E. Bernheim, Ausgemihlte Urdkun- 
den sur Erliuterung der Verfassungsgeschichte 
Deutschlands, Berlin, 1895. (Useful collec- 
tions of documents.) 

F. Gregorovius, History of the City of Rome in the 
Middle Ages, 7 vols in 11, London, 1894-1900. 
(From the fifth century to the sixteenth. Not 
always quite judicious or accurate, but still a 
most useful guide to the whole of the middle 
ages.) 

T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, Oxford, 1880- 
1899. (A very interesting and valuable 
account of the period from a.p, 376-800. 
Vols vi—-viii especially concern us.) 

F. Dahn, Die Konige der Germanen, vols 1-8, 
Leipzig, 1861-1899. 

N. D. Fustel de Coulanges, Histoire des institutions 
politiques de l’ancienne France, 6 vols, Paris, 
1875-92. 

W. Giesebrecht, Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserseit, 
fifth edition, vols 1-3, Leipzig, 1881-90. 


Bibliography 155 


H. K. Mann, History of the Popes in the Early 
Middle Ages, 1901 f. (From Gregory I: in 
progress. Written from a pronouncedly ultra- 
montane standpointand somewhat amateurish, 
but well-informed.) 

L. Duchesne, Les premiers temps de [ Etat pontifical, 
Paris, 1898. 

E. Emerton, /ntroduction to the Middle Ages, Boston, 
1888. (From 378-800. An excellent outline.) 

E. Emerton, Medieval Europe, Boston, 1894. (Con- 
tinuation of the former.) 

R. W. Church, The Beginning of the Middle Ages, 
London, 1894 (valuable). 

J. Barmby, Gregory the Great, London, 1892 
(popular). 

F. W. Kellett, Gregory the Great and his Relations 
nith Gaul, Cambridge, 1899. 

C. Merivale and G. F. Maclear, Conversion of the 
West, 5 vols, London, S.P.C.K. (popular). 

J. Mendham, The Seventh General Council, London, 
n.d. (c. 1840). (Translations of documents 
for the most part.) 

Eginhard [Einhard], Life of Charles the Great. 
Tr. by W. Glaister, London, 1877. 

T. Hodgkin, Charles the Great, London, 1897. 

J. I. Mombert, History of Charles the Great, 
London, 1888. 

J. Bass Mullinger, Schools of Charles the Great, 
London, 1877. 

J. A. G. Hergenréther, Photius, 3 vols, Regens- 
burg, 1867-69. 

E. Hatch, Gronth of Church Institutions, London, 
1887. 


ata 
156 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


S. R. Maitland, The Dark Ages, London, many 
editions. 

S. Lane-Poole, History of Egypt in the Middle Ages, 
London, 1901. 

R. P. A. Dozy, Histoire des Musulmans d’ Espagne, 
4 vols, Leyden, 1861. 





3. From THE Time or Hi_tpesrRaNnD TO THE END 
OF THE FirreENTH CENTURY. 


Langen, Gregorovius, and Giesebrecht are still 
useful. Milman improves as he goes on; 
but from 1376 his place is taken altogether 
by Creighton. Jaffé (after 1198 Potthast), 
Pflugk-Harttung, and Boehmer are still in- 
valuable. The registers of the Popes from the 
middle of the thirteenth century are being pub- 
lished under the auspices of the French School 
in Rome (see below under Berger and Prou). 

A. Potthast, Regesta pontificum Romanorum, 1198- 
1304, 2 vols, Berlin, 1874—5. 

S. Loewenfeld, Epistolae pontificum Romanorum 
ineditae, Leipzig, 1885. 

E. Berger, Les registres d’ Innocent IV, Paris, 1886. 

M. Prou, Les registres d’Honorius IV, Paris, 1886. 
(And the registers of later popes.) 

M. Goldast, Monarchia 8S, Romani imperii, 3 vols, 
Hanover and Frankfort, 1611-13. 

J. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, London, many 
editions. 

H. A. L. Fisher, The Medieval Empire, 2 vols, 
London, 1900. 

J. J. I. von Doellinger, Fables respecting the Popes 
of the Middle Ages, London, 1871. 


Bibliography 157 


P. Jaffé, Monumenta Gregoriana, Berlin (Bibl. rer. 
Germanicarum, 1864-73, vol. ii.). 

A. F. Villemain, Life of Gregory VII, 2 vols, 
London, 1874. 

W. R. W. Stephens, Hildebrand and his Times, 
London, 1888 (popular). 

R. W. Church, Life of St Anselm, London, many 
editions. 

B. Kugler, Geschichte der Kreuzsiige, Berlin, 
1880. 

R. Réhricht, Beitrage zur Geschichte der Kreussiige, 
2 vols, Berlin, 1874—78. 

R. Rohricht, Geschichte der Kreuzsiige im Umriss, 
Innsbriick, 1898. (An excellent summary.) 

T. A. Archer and C. L. Kingsford, The Crusades, 
London, 1894. 

J. C. Morison, Life of St Bernard, London, 1868. 

U. Balzani, The Popes and the Hohenstaufen, Lon- 
don, 1889 (popular). 

G. B. Testa, The War of Frederick I against the 
Communes of Lombardy, London, 1887. 

I. Farnell, The Lives of the Troubadours, London, 
1896. 

F. von Hurter, Geschichte Innocenz III, 4 vols, 
Hamburg, 1834-42. (French translation by 
St Cheron and Haiber, Paris, 1855.) 

H. D. Lacordaire, Vie de St Dominique, Paris, 
many editions. 

P. Sabatier, Vie de S,. Frangois d’Assise,1 Paris, 

1 For other literature on St Francis and the Franciscan 

movement see the first occasional paper of the British 
branch of the International Society of Franciscan Studies. 


(Secretary, Rev. James Adderley, St Mark’s Vicarage, Mary- 
lebone Road, London.) 


158 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


many editions. (English translation by L. S. 
Houghton, London, many editions.) 

T. L. Kington [Oliphant], History of Frederick II, 
2 vols, Cambridge, 1862. 

M. Amari, Guerra del Vespro Siciliano, new edition, 
Florence, 1897. (Translation of an old edition 
by the Earl of Ellesmere, 3 vols, London, 
1850.) 

L. Tosti, Storia de Bonifazio VIII, 2 vols, Monte 
Cassino, 1846. 

M. Creighton, History of the Papacy to the Sack of 
Rome, 6 vols, London, 1897. 

L. Pastor, History of the Popes from the Close of the 
Middle Ages, 6 vols, London, 1891-98. 

F, Palacky, Documenta J. Hus vitam &c, illus- 
trantia, Prag, 1869. 

H. B. Workman, The Church in the Middle Ages, 
London, 1898, 1900. 

H. B. Workman, The Dann of the Reformation, 
2 vols, London, 1901-2. (Good popular 
works. ) 

J. H. Wylie, The Council of Constance to the Death 
of Hus, London, 1900. 

J. Burckhardt, The Civilisation of the Renaissance, 
London, 1890. 

J. Addington Symonds, Renaissance in Italy, T vols, 
London, 1897-99. 

P. Villari, Life of Savonarola, 2 vols, London, 
1888. 

P. Villari, Machiavelli and his Times, 2 vols, 
London, 1892. 

A. von Reumont, Lorenso de’ Medici, 2 vols, 
London, 1876. 


Bibliography 159 


E. Armstrong, Lorenzo de’ Medici, London, 1897 
(Heroes of the Nations). 


. Tue Periop or THE REFORMATION, 


Of the general Church histories, Moeller, Schaff, 
and Mosheim are especially valuable, the 
latter in particular for all that concerns the 
smaller religious bodies. On the secular side, 
the Cambridge Modern History supersedes all 
else (especially vol. ii, with a very complete 
bibliography). Unfortunately we lose Creigh- 
ton after a.p. 1527. 

C. Beard (Unitarian), The Reformation of the Six- 
teenth Century (Hibbert Lectures), London, 
1883. 

C. Beard, Martin Luther and the Reformation in 
Germany, London, 1889. 

K. R. Hagenbach, History of the Reformation in 
Germany and Switzerland, 2 vols, Edinburgh, 
1878. 

L. Von Ranke, History of the Popes, London, many 
editions. 

A. L. Moore, History of the Reformation, London, 
1890 (lectures, unsystematic), 

M. Philippson, La Contre-Révolution, Brussels, 1884. 

J. Jortin, Life of Erasmus, 2 vols, London, 1758-60. 

R. B. Drummond, Erasmus, 2 vols, London, 1873. 

J. Késtlin, Life of Luther, London, 1883. (Second 
edition of the original, practically a new 
book, 2 vols, Elberfeld, 1883.) 

Th. Kolde, Martin Luther, 2 vols, Gotha, 1884-93. 

F. W. Kampschulte, Calvin in Genf, Leipzig, 1896- 
99. 


160 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


R. Stihelin, Zwingli, 2 vols, Basel, 1895-7. 

Heroes of the Reformation, ed. by S. M. Jackson, 
New York, 1898 f. (Good popular biogra- 
phies of Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Melan- 
chthon, Zwingli, Beza, and others.) 

P. Sarpi, History of the Council of Trent. (Many 
translations; the best in French, with notes 
by P. F. Le Courayer.) 

C. Cantu, Gli Eretici d’ Italia, 3 vols, Turin, 1865-7. 

M. Menendez y Pelayo, Historia de los Heterodoxos 
Espaiioles, 3 vols, Madrid, 1880-82. 

J. L. Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic, many 
editions. 

J. L. Motley, The United Netherlands, 4 vols, 
London, 1875-6. 

H. M. Baird, The Rise of the Huguenots, 2 vols, 
London, 1880. 

H. M. Baird, The Huguenots and Henry of Navarre, 
2 vols, London, 1886. 

L. A. Anjou, Svenska Kyrko-reformationens Historia, 
8 vols, Stockholm, 1851. (English transla- 
tion by H. Mason, New York, 1859.) 

A. C. Bang, Den Norske Kirkes Historie i det sextende 
aarhundrede, Christiania, 1901. 

For a fuller treatment see the (forthcoming) Sug- 
gestions for the Study of the History of the 
Reformation Period, by the present writer 
(Chureh Historical Society's Publications). 


5. Tue Post-Rerormation Perron. 


The material is so voluminous, and the lines of 
development so widespread, that it is diffi- 
cult to study the Church history of modern 





Bibliography 161 


days in a collected form. The general 
Church histories of Gieseler (vol. v, Bonn, 
1855) and Mosheim, however (especially 
Mosheim in its English dress, with continua- 
tions by Soames and Stubbs, the latter valu- 
able), are very convenient ; and the following 
books may also be used: 

J. J. I. von Doellinger, The Church and the Churches, 
London, 1862. 

K. R. Hagenbach, History of the Church in the 
Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, 2 vols, 
New York, 1869 (being vols vi and vii of his 
Kirchengeschichte, Leipzig, 1870-1887, of 
which vols iv and v will also be found 
useful), 

F. Nippold, Handbuch der neuesten Kirchengeschichte, 
5 vols, Berlin, 1880-96. (There is an abbre- 
viated translation of vol. ii by L. Schwab, 
The Papacy in the Nineteenth Century, New 
York, 1900.) 

J. Tholuck, Das kirchliche Leben des 17. Jahrhun- 
derts, 2 vols, Berlin, 1861-2. 

E. L. T. Henke, Neuere Kirchengeschichte, 3 vols, 
Halle, 1874-80. 


FY, 


The Church of Christ knows no limits of space or 
time, but its history has been realised from the first 
in that of Churches which are limited both in space 
and time. The conception of the Cuurcues is as 
ancient and in one sense (from the point of view of 
the historian) as important as that of the Cuurcn. 
L 


162 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


Amongst books dealing with the history of par- 
ticular Churches, and of particular institutions, the 
following may be mentioned : 


1, Toe Eastern Cuurcues, 


M. Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, 3 vols, Paris, 1740. 

J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, 4 vols, Rome, 
1719-28. 

H. Denzinger, Ritus Orientalium, Wiirzburg, 1863. 

F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, 
vol. i, Oxford, 1896. 

E. J. Kimmel, Monumenta fidei Ecclesiae Orientalis, 
2 vols, Jena, 1850. 

G. A. Ralli and M. Potli, 2tvraypa trav Oey Kai 
iepdv Kavovwv, 5 vols, Athens, 1852 f. 

G. Finlay, History of Greece, ed. H. F. Tozer, 7 
vols, Oxford, 1877. 

Leo Allatius, De ecclesiae orientalis et occidentalis 

consensione, Kéln, 1648. 

G. F. Hertzberg, Geschichte der Byzantiner, Berlin, 
1883. 

J. M. Neale, History of the Holy Eastern Church, 
5 vols, 1847, 1850, 1873. 

J. M. Vansleb, Histoire de léglise d’ Alexandrie, 
Paris, 1677. 

A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the Eastern Church, Lon- 
don, 1883. 

J. Hackett, History of the Church of Cyprus, Lon- 
don, 1901. 

A. N. Mouravieff, History of Church of Russia, 
Oxford, 1842. 

A. Leroy Beaulieu, L’empire des Tsars, vol. iii, 
Paris, 1889. 


Bibliography 163 


R. W. Blackmore, Doctrine of the Russian Church, 
Aberdeen, 1845. 

W. J. Birkbeck, Russia and the English Church, 
vol. i, London, 1895. 

J. Ludolf, Historia £thiopica and Commentarius, 
Frankfurt, 1691-92. 

A. J. Butler, Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt, 
Oxford, 1884. 

E. Dulaurier, Histoire de ['église Arméniane, Paris, 
1859. 

G. P. Badger, The Nestorians, 2 vols., London, 
1852. 

J. W. Etheridge, The Syrian Churches, London, 
1846. 

A. J. Maclean, The Catholicos of the East and his 
People, London, 1891. 


2. Tue Enciish Cuurcu. 


W. R. W. Stephens (editor), History of the Church 
of England, 7 vols, London, 1899 f. (Refer- 
ences to authorities ; indispensable.) 

Jeremy Collier, Ecclesiastical History of Great 
Britain, 9 vols, London, 1840. (To the 
death of Charles II.) 

T. Fuller, Church History of Britain, ed. J. S. 
Brewer, 6 vols, London, 1862 f. 

H. O. Wakeman, History of the Church of England, 
London, many editions. 

G. G. Perry, Student’s History of the Church of 
England, 3 vols, London, many editions. 

J. H. Overton, The Church of England, 2 vols, 
London [1897]. 


164 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


W. H. Hutton, Short History of the Church in Great 
Britain, London, 1899. 

D. Wilkins, Concilia Magnae Britanniae, 4 vols, 
London, 1737. 

A. W. Haddan and W. Stubbs, Councils and Eccle- 
siastical Documents, 3 vols, Oxford, 1869-78. 

J. Johnson, English Canons, 2 vols, Oxford, 1850-51. 

E. Cardwell, Works, Oxford, 1840-44. 

W. Lyndwode, Provinciale, Oxford, 1679.. 

E. Gibson, Codex Juris Ecclesiastici Anglicani, 
second edition, 2 vols, Oxford, 1761. 

H. Gee and W. J. Hardy, Documents illustrative of 
English Church History, London, 1896. 

W. Maskell, Monumenta Ritualia Ecclesiae Angli- 
canae, 3 vols, Oxford, 1882. 

W. Maskell, Ancient Liturgy of the Church of 
England, Oxford, 1882. 

F. Makower, Constitutional History of the Church of 
England, London, 1895. 

R. W. Dixon, History of the English Church (from 
the beginning of the Reformation to 1570), 
6 vols, London, 1878-1902. 

W. E. Collins, The English Reformation and its 
Consequences, London, 1901. 

For further information see Suggestions for the 
Study of English Church History, by the present 
writer. (Church Historical Society’s Publica- 
tions, No. Ixi, price 2d.) 

8. Orner Loca CuvrcueEs. 

V. Guettée, Histoire de l'église de France, 12 vols, 
Paris, 1856. 

J. Longueval, &c., Histoire de ['église Gallicane, 18 
vols, Paris, 1732-49. 


Bibliography 165 


W. H. Jervis, History of the Church of France from 
1516, 3 vols, London, 1872-82. 


A. J. Binterim, Geschichte der deutschen Concilien, 
7 vols, Mainz, 1835-48. 

F, W. Rettberg, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 2 
vols, Géttingen, 1846-48. 

A. Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 3 vols, 
Leipzig, 1896-1900. 


H. Florez and others, Espaia Sagrada, 52 vols, 
Madrid, 17541879. 

V. de la Fuente, Historia eclesidstica de Espana, 
5 vols, Madrid, 1874, &c. 

P. B. Gams, Kirchengeschichte von Spanien, 5 vols, 
Regensburg, 1862-70. 

R. Altamira y Crevea, Historia de Espaiia, 3 vols, 
Barcelona, 1900 f. (An admirable short 
history.) 


F. Miinter, Kirchengeschichte von Dénemark und 
Norwegen, 3 vols, Leipzig, 1823-33. 

L. N. Helveg, Den Danske Kirkes Historie, 5 vols, 
Copenhagen, 1870. 

T. B. Willson, History of Church and State in 
Norway, London, 1903. 

O. Montelius, H. Hildebrand, &c, Sveriges historia, 
6 vols, Stockholm, 1877-81. 


4, Tue Monastic Orpers, &c. 


L. Holstenius, Coder Regularum, ed. M. Brockie, 6 
vols, Vienna, 1759. 





166 Study of Ecclesiastical History 


E. Martene, De antiquis monachorum ritibus, Lyons, 
1690. 

P. Helyot, Histoire des ordres monastiques, ed. 
Philippon, 7 vols, Paris, 1838. 

J. Mabillon, Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedict, 6 
vols, Lucca, 1739-45. 

T. Malvenda, Annales Ordinis Praedicatorum, Naples, 
1627. 

L. Wadding, Annales Minorum, 24 vols, Rome, 
1731-1864. 


THE END 


Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & Co, 
Edinburgh & London 


Handbooks for the Clergy 


EDITED BY 
Tue Rey. ARTHUR W. ROBINSON, B.D. 


VICAR OF ALLHALLOWS BARKING BY THE TOWER 
Price 2s. 6d. each net. 


The purpose of the writers of the Volumes in this Series will be to 
present in a clear and attractive way the responsibilities and opportunities 
of the Clergy of to-day, and to offer such practical guidance, in regard 
both to aims and to methods, as experience may have shown to be valu- 
able. It is hoped that the Series, while primarily intended for those who 
are already face to face with the duties and problems of the ministerial 
office, may be of interest and assistance also to others who are consider- 
ing the question of entering into Holy Orders ; and, indeed, to all who 
have the welfare of the Church at heart. 





THE PERSONAL LIFE OF THE CLERGY. By the Eprror, 
Third Impression. 


PATRISTIC STUDY. By the Rev. H. B. Swers, D.D., Regius 
Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. Second Edition. 


THE MINISTRY OF CONVERSION. By the Rev. A. J. Mason, 
D.D., Master of Pembroke College, Cambridge. Second Impression. 


FOREIGN MISSIONS. By the Right Rev. H. H. Montcomery, 
D.D., formerly Bishop of Tasmania, Secretary of the Society for the Pro- 
pagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. Third Impression. 


THE STUDY OF THE GOSPELS. Bythe Very Rev. J. AnmitacE 
ROBINSON, D.D., Dean of Westminster. Third Impression. 


A CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC. By the Very Rev. Witrorp L. 
ROBBINS, Dean of the General Theological Seminary, New York. Second 
Impression. 

PASTORAL VISITATION. By the Rev. H. E. Savacz, M.A,, 
Vicar of South Shields, and Hon. Canon of Durham. 


AUTHORITY AND THE PRINCIPLE OF OBEDIENCE. By 
the Very Rey. T. B. STRONG, D.D., Dean of Christ Church. 


THE STUDY OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. By the Rev. 
W. E. Couns, M.A., Professor of Ecclesiastical History in King’s College, 
London, and Chairman of the Church Historical Society. 


SCIENCE AND RELIGION. By the Rev. P. N. Waaczrt, M.A., 


of the Society of St. John the Evangelist, Cowley. [In the Press. 
CHURCH MUSIC. By A. Mavetry RicHarpson, Mus. Doc, 
Organist of St. Saviour’s Collegiate Church, Southwark. [In the Press. 
INTEMPERANCE. By the Rev. H. H. Pererra, M.A., Vicar of 
Croydon, and Hon. Canon of Canterbury. (Jn the Press. 
SCHOOLS. By the Rev. W. Foxiey Norris, M.A., Rector of 
Barnsley, and Hon. Canon of Wakefield. (Zn Preparation. 
LAY WORK. By the Right Rev. Huysnz Yrarman-Bices, D.D., 
Lord Bishop of Southwark. Un Preparation. 





LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 
LONDON, NEW FORE, AND BOMBAY 





Che Orford Library of Wractical a 


Edited by the Rev, W. C. E. Newsout, M.A., Canon and Chancellor 
of St. Paul's; and the Rev. DARWELL Stor, M.A., Librarian of the 
Pusey House, Oxford, 


Price 5s. per Volwme. 
RELIGION. By the Rev. W. C. E. Newsort, M.A., Canon and 
Chancellor of St. Paul's. Fifth Impression. 
HOLY BAPTISM. By the Rev. Darwett Stone, M.A., Librarian 
of the Pusey House, Oxford. Third Edition. 
CONFIRMATION. By the Right Rev. A.C, A. Hatt, D.D., Bishop 
of Vermont. Third Impression. 


THE HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER, | By 
the Rey. LEIGHTON PULLAN, M.A., Fellow of St. John Baptist’s College, 
Oxford. Third Edition. 


HOLY MATRIMONY. By the Rev. W. J. Knox Lirtie, M.A., 
Canon of Worcester. Second Edition. 

THE INCARNATION, By the Rev. H. V.S. Eox, M.A., Rector of 
Bethnal Green, Second Edition. 

FOREIGN MISSIONS. By the Right Rev. E. T. Cuurton, D.D., 
formerly Bishop of Nassau. 

PRAYER. By the Rev. ArtHur JoHN Woxr.ugper, M.A., Canon 
and Chancellor of Truro. Second Edition. 

SUNDAY. By the Rev. W. B. Trevetyan, M.A., Vicar of St. 
Matthew's, Westminster. Second Edition. 

THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION. By the Rev. LzicHTon Putian, 
M.A., Fellow of St. John Baptist’s College, Oxford. 

BOOKS OF DEVOTION. By the Rev. Cuartes BopineTon, Canon 
and Treasurer of Lichfield. 

HOLY ORDERS. By the Rev. A. R. WuiTHam, M.A., Principal of 
Culham College, Abingdon. 

THE CHURCH CATECHISM THE CHRISTIAN’S MANUAL, 
By the Rev. W. C. E. NEWBOLT, M.A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul’s. 


THE HOLY COMMUNION. By the Rev. D, Sronz, M.A, 
Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. (Un the Press. 


IN PREPARATION, 
THE BIBLE. By the Rev. Darnwett Strong, M.A., Librarian of the 
Pusey House, Oxford. 


RELIGIOUS CEREMONIAL. By the Rev. Watrer Howarp 
FRERE, M.A., of the Community of the Resurrection, Examining Chaplain 
to the ‘Bishop of Rochester. 


VISITATION OF THE SICK. By the Rev. E. F. Russert, M.A, 
of St. Alban’s, Holborn 


CHURCH WORK. By the Rev. Bernarp ReyrNnowps, M.A., Pre- 
bendary of St. Paul’s. 


OLD TESTAMENT CRITICISM. By the Very Rev. Henry Wacz, 
D.D., Dean of Canterbury. 


NEW TESTAMENT CRITICISM. By the Rev. R. J, Know1ina, 
D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis at King’s College, London. 


CHURCH HISTORY. By the Rev. H. N. Barz, M.A, Magdalen 
College, Oxford. 2 vols. 


LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO, 
LONDON, NEW ORE, AND BOMBAY 


Messts. Longmans & Co.’s Mew Books 


THE AGE OF THE FATHERS: Being Chapters in the History of 
the Church during the Fourth and Fifth Century. By the late WILLIAM 
BRIGHT, D.D., Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the University 
of Oxford, and Canon of Christ Church. Edited by WALTER Loog, D.D., 
Warden of Keble College, Oxford, and C. H, TURNER, M.A., Magdalen 
College, Oxford. 2 vols., 8vo. 28s, net. 


ORDINATION ADDRESSES. By W. Srusss, D.D., late Lord 
Bishop of Oxford. Edited by the Rev. E. E. HouMEs, formerly Domestic 
Chaplain to the Bishop; Hon. Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. With 
Photogravure Portrait. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. 


UNIVERSITY AND OTHER SERMONS. By Manpet 


CREIGHTON, late Bishop of London. Crown 8vo. 65s. net. 


THE CHURCH AND THE NATION: Charges and Addresses, 
By MANDELL CREIGHTON, D.D., late Lord Bishop of London, Crown 8vo. 
5s. net. 


APOSTLES OF THE LORD: Being Six Lectures on Pastoral 
Theology, delivered in the Divinity School, Cambridge. Lent Term, 1901. 
By the Rev. W. C. E. NEWBOLT, M,A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul's 
Cathedral. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net. 


PRIESTLY BLEMISHES Nor, Some Secret Hindrances to the 
Realisation of Priestly Ideals. A Sequel. Being a Second Course of Prac- 
tical Lectures delivered in St. Paul’s Cathedral to ‘Our Society” and other 
Clergy in Lent 1902. By the Rev. W. C. E. NEWBOLT, M.A., Canon and 
Chancellor of St. Paul’s Cathedral. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 


PRAEPARATIO: Or, Notes of Preparation for Holy Communion 
founded on the Collect, Epistle, and Gospel, for Every Sunday in the Year. 
With Preface by the Rev. GEORGE CONGREVE, S.S.J.E. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. 


THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. An Article reprinted, with 
slight Additions, from the Church Quarterly Review. By DARWELL STONE, 
M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 


THE GLORY OF THE CROSS. Sermons by the Rev. Joun 
WAKEFORD, B.D., Vicar of St. Margaret, Anfield, Liverpool. Crown 8vo. 
2s. 6d. net. 


MEDITATIONS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT FOR EVERY 
DAY IN THE YEAR. By the Rev. B. W. RANDOLPH, D.D., Principal of 
the Theological College, Ely. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. 


GOD AND THE INDIVIDUAL. By the Very Rev. T. B, Srnone, 
D.D., Dean of Christ Church, Oxford. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 





LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 
LONDON, NEW bie sa AND BOMBAY 


M 






Lath i: 
* e 


Books 


4 
. 


Messrs. Longmans & Co.’s Mew 





SEconD AND CHEAPER EDITION, REVISED. 


THE MINISTRY OF GRACE: Studies in Early Church History, 
with Reference to Present Problems. By JOHN WORDSWORTH, Bishop of 
Salisbury, D.D. Oxford, Hon. D.D, Berne, Hon. LL.D. Dublin. Crown 8vo. 
6s. 6d. net. 


GOSPEL RECORDS INTERPRETED BY HUMAN EXPERI- 
ENCE. By H. A. DALLAS, Author of ‘‘The Victory that Overcometh.” 
Crown 8vo. 65s. net. 


JESUS’ WAY: An Appreciation of the Teaching in the Synoptic 
Gospels. By WILLIAM DE WITT Hybz, President of Bowdoin College, U.S. 
Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net. 


FirrH IMPRESSION. 


THE VARIETIES OF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE: A Study in 
Human Nature. Being the Gifford Lectures on Natural Religion delivered 
at Edinburgh in 1901-1902. By WILLIAM JAmeEs, LL.D., Professor of 
Philosophy at Harvard University. 8vo. 12s. net. 


THE CREEDS: An Historical and Doctrinal Exposition of the 
Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds. By the Rev. ALFRED G. Mor- 
TIMER, D.D., Rector of St. Mark’s, Philadelphia, U.S. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. 


HUMAN NATURE A REVELATION OF THE DIVINE: A 
Sequel to “Studies in the Character of Christ.” By the Rey. CHARLES 
HENRY ROBINSON, M.A., Editorial Secretary to the S.P.G. and Hon. Canon of 
Ripon. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. 


OUTLINES OF MEDITATIONS FOR USE IN RETREAT. By 
the Rev. DARWELL STONE, M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. 
Feap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 


* ANIMA CHRISTI :” Devotional Addresses. By the Rev. Jessz 
BRETT, L.Th., Chaplain of All Saints’ Hospital, Eastbourne. Feap. 8vo. 
ls. net. 


By THE Rev. W. R. CARSON, Roman Catuouic Priest, 


AN EUCHARISTIC EIRENICON. With an Introduction by the 
Right Honourable the VISCOUNT HALIFAX. S8vo. Sewed, Is. 6d. net. 


REUNION ESSAYS. With an Appendix on the Non-infallible Force 
of the Bull Apost. Cure in condemnation of the Holy Orders of the Church 
of England. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net. 


LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 
LONDON, NEW YORK, AND BOMBAY 
oe 


Loe 











— =? 








" 


| 4 
| t. 
te 








niin 


| 
n 


